Defendant’s stop was justified, but getting him out of the vehicle for a frisk was not. Suppressed. People v. Turner, 2022 Mich. App. LEXIS 4943 (Aug. 18, 2022) (2-1).
On the totality, defendant consented to an interview in his own house. He invited the officers in, they were in plain clothes, they all shook hands, weapons weren’t drawn, and it was conversational. United States v. Woody, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 23133 (10th Cir. Aug. 19, 2022).*
CoA denied. Defense counsel raised the Franks claim defendant raises now, but it failed on the defense burden of proof. Thomas v. United States, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 23148 (6th Cir. Aug. 18, 2022).*
“The evidence demonstrated the vehicle was owned by the rental company, it was leased to someone other than Appellant, the rental agreement had lapsed, and the record does not support Appellant having authorization to use the vehicle. As a result, Appellant lacked standing to contest the validity of the search of that vehicle.” State v. Wells, 2022-Ohio-2903, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 2735 (5th Dist. Aug. 17, 2022).
On defendant’s motion to suppress his search on supervised release, the parole search exception applies, not specifically the special needs exception. United States v. Alfaro, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148432 (W.D.N.Y. Aug. 18, 2022).
Defendant’s stop for traveling two miles in the passing lane and slightly behind a tractor-trailer without passing was reasonable under state law. State v. Breznai, 2022 OK CR 17, 2022 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 16 (Aug. 18, 2022).*
Posted inProbation / Parole search, Standing|Comments Off on OH5: No standing in rental car where contract expired and driver was not authorized on contract
“Given Lege’s affirmative consent and the fact that he stepped back and appeared to welcome Oster into his apartment, a reasonable officer would have concluded that he had consent to enter the apartment, …, and the district court properly concluded that no reasonable juror would find to the contrary.” Lege v. City of Ketchikan, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 23078 (9th Cir. Aug. 18, 2022).
The GPS tracking warrant was supported by probable cause, and the Franks challenge failed. United States v. Edwards, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148181 (D. Minn. June 21, 2022).*
Defendant was reasonably subjected to an investigative detention, not a felony stop with weapons drawn. United States v. Curiel-Rodriguez, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148272 (D. Colo. Aug. 18, 2022).*
The warrant for the entirety of defendant’s Instagram account was not a general search. United States v. Smith, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147892 (W.D. Mo. Aug. 18, 2022).
Seeing a handgun protruding from defendant’ waistband as he walked down the street was reasonable suspicion. United States v. Ross, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148147 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 18, 2022).*
“Even if any of the five warrants were not supported by probable cause, the evidence would still be admissible under the Leon good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule. None of Edwards’s objections raises any reason to believe that the warrant applications were so lacking in indicia of probable cause as to render official belief in their existence entirely unreasonable, and this Court finds none.” United States v. Edwards, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147795 (D. Minn. Aug. 18, 2022).*
Shooting a man advancing on an officer with a running chainsaw who was ignoring police commands to stop was subject to qualified immunity. Esker v. Lutz, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 23033 (7th Cir. Aug. 18, 2022).*
The defendant officers’ contention that their use of force was in a “gray area” only served to underscore that this was a fact question for trial. Qualified immunity properly denied. Meadows v. City of Walker, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 23022 (6th Cir. Aug. 18, 2022).*
The record shows a lack of reasonable suspicion for defendant’s continued detention for the dog sniff. Suppressed. State v. Dominguez, 2022 Tex. App. LEXIS 6065 (Tex. App. – El Paso Aug. 18, 2022).*
Posted inDog sniff, Qualified immunity|Comments Off on CA7: Shooting a man using a running chainsaw as an apparent weapon was subject to QI
Not filing a frivolous motion to suppress isn’t ineffective assistance of counsel, and it could harm the cause more than help. United States v. Sesepasara, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147899 (D. Haw. Aug. 18, 2022):
The taxpayer’s third-party financial records suit was not barred by the Anti-Injunction Act. It was not against collection of a tax, but the government retaining records. Remanded to consider other issues as well. Harper v. Rettig, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 23025 (1st Cir. Aug. 18, 2022).
The question of lack of reasonable suspicion for a stop is raised for the first time on appeal. The record as a whole supports that there was. United States v. Deluca, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 23003 (10th Cir. Aug. 18, 2022).*
There was reasonable suspicion for defendant’s stop based on a call to 911 from a citizen informant whose information was substantially corroborated. United States v. South, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 23015 (4th Cir. Aug. 18, 2022).*
Where the wiretap was valid, the resulting search based on that probable cause of defendant’s home was valid. United States v. Barronette, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 23018 (4th Cir. Aug. 18, 2022).*
Pre-Jardines dog sniff at the door of an apartment was valid when it happened, so it is saved by the good faith exception under Davis. United States v. Perez, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 22977 (8th Cir. Aug. 18, 2022).
“In the present case, trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to move to suppress the evidence because the warrantless entry of the home was justified by the emergency aid exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement.” Head v. Carl, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147271 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 17, 2022).*
Defendant was reasonably suspected of fraud in obtaining a bunch of iPhones by fraud. The alleged reasonable suspicion of a traffic offense doesn’t matter. Solano v. State, 2022 Tex. App. LEXIS 6023 (Tex. App. – Tyler Aug. 17, 2022).*
Defendant consented to the officer handling his secondary cell phone that wasn’t able to make calls. The officer accidentally saw child pornography on the phone in plain view, and it was all reasonable. Thomson v. State, 2022 Tex. App. LEXIS 6032 (Tex. App. – Houston (1st Dist.) Aug. 18, 2022).
There was probable cause for seizure of defendant’s motorcycle for forfeiture. On Rule 41(g), the court does not have to address whether it has evidentiary value. United States v. Engstrom, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147071 (D. Nev. Aug. 17, 2022).
Uncorroborated statements about sex trafficking going on at defendant’s residence was still probable cause. United States v. Giles, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147266 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 17, 2022).*
Having gotten defendant out of the car, there was a gun in plain view where he was reaching. State v. Kay, 2022-Ohio-2862, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 2696 (5th Dist. Aug. 17, 2022).*
The use of an alias to rent a hotel room doesn’t forfeit a reasonable expectation of privacy in it. The warrantless entry here was unreasonable. United States v. Henning, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147239 (S.D. W. Va. Aug. 17, 2022).
Defendant stored records in the basement of his mother’s house. He did not have standing to challenge the search of the house, but he did have standing in the records he stored there with her permission. United States v. Marinelli, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146710 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 16, 2022).
Plaintiff has no reasonable expectation of privacy in work emails that are monitored. Cooper v. Pa. Hum. Rels. Comm’n, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146711 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 16, 2022).
Posted inReasonable expectation of privacy|Comments Off on S.D.W.Va.: Using an alias to rent a hotel room is not a waiver of a REP in it
The traffic stop was delayed, and the public safety exception was not applicable, where the officer asked a compound question, and the questioning only appeared directed at getting an admission by appellant that he had drugs on him and suggesting a more thorough search was about to come. State v. Withrow, 2022-Ohio-2850, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 2686 (7th Dist. Aug. 9, 2022).
The trial court erred by finding that the search warrant was valid because the court had a conclusory, bare-bones affidavit that omitted critical information deputy could have actually possessed, and included incorrect or misleading information due to either carelessness or intentional indifference to the truth. State v. Hilliard, 2022-Ohio-2849, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 2692 (7th Dist. Aug. 9, 2022).*
Defendant lost his CSLI argument on the merits. Reformulating the argument as an ineffective assistance of counsel claim here does no good. Hargett v. United States, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146575 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 16, 2022).*
“[T]he air freshener in a non-smoking rental car was an early and legitimate basis for suspicion to be aroused. In general, the use of air fresheners is a recognized factor contributing to reasonable suspicion.” United States v. Hawari-Rasulullah, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145808 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 15, 2022).
Police getting an arrest warrant further in time from the event than they could have is irrelevant. United States v. Smallwood, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146055 (E.D. Tenn. July 15, 2022).
This case started with an arrest without probable cause and a search incident, and it devolved from there. All suppressed. United States v. Miller, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146316 (S.D. W. Va. Aug. 15, 2022).*
“Sedlak cannot show that his underlying Fourth Amendment claim was meritorious for purposes of a COA because the case law he references is distinguishable and does not create a debatable claim as to Strickland prejudice. … Consequently, Sedlak cannot show that counsel was ineffective.” Sedlak v. United States, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 22783 (11th Cir. Aug. 16, 2022).*
It is not a violation of the Fourth Amendment to tell the defendant to keep his hands visible and not reach in the car during a stop. If a person can be ordered out of the car for officer safety, that’s not burdensome at all. United States v. Minor, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145906 (W.D.N.C. Aug. 16, 2022).
The exclusionary rule does not apply in § 1983 cases. Klein v. Steinkamp, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 22692 (8th Cir. Aug. 16, 2022).
“[W]hether Defendant actually committed the violations identified by Nowicki is not the issue; the issue is whether Nowicki reasonably believed that a traffic violation had occurred.” He did. United States v. Hawari-Rasulullah, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145808 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 15, 2022).*
Defendant’s car was registered in Arkansas and was believed to be in a shootout in Mississippi. The car was found in Arkansas. Defendant was arrested on a Mississippi warrant and a search warrant was issued for the car’s GPS to put it in Mississippi. Murry v. State, 2022 Miss. App. LEXIS 266 (Aug. 16, 2022).*
The affidavit for search warrant shows probable cause. The court can find no case that says that a possible suggestive police show up added to the information is a lack of probable cause. United States v. Washington, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144346 (W.D. Ky. Aug. 12, 2022).
A city’s sobriety checkpoint fit within the limited exception to the Fourth Amendment for certain carefully circumscribed vehicle checkpoints where its primary purpose was to remove intoxicated drivers from the roadway, and any marginal intrusion on liberty associated with adding license checks to the city’s DUI checkpoint was minimal and justified by the important interest in road safety served by such inquiries. The officer did not violate the Fourth Amendment by detaining and ultimately arresting plaintiff when he refused to produce his driver’s license because, once plaintiff refused, the officer had probable cause to believe that plaintiff was violating the Vehicle Code. Demarest v. City of Vallejo, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 22714 (9th Cir. Aug. 16, 2022).
A jail excessive force case that happened before plaintiff’s probable cause hearing is a Fourth Amendment claim, not under the Fourteenth Amendment. Geddes v. Weber Cty., 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 22719 (10th Cir. Aug. 16, 2022):
Probable cause supported the warrant to install a GPS tracking device on defendant’s vehicle. The government showed probable cause to believe it and he were involved in a series of cash store robberies. United States v. Rolling, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145547 (W.D. Mich. Aug. 15, 2022).
The factors for reasonable suspicion here just don’t add up to it on the totality. By the time defendant consented, the stop was already unreasonable. Search suppressed. United States v. Alderson, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144379 (M.D. Tenn. Aug. 12, 2022).
The state failed to prove that the inventory here was conducted under a standardized procedure. State v. Toran, 2022-Ohio-2796, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 2654 (1st Dist. Aug. 12, 2022).*
The evidence supports consent on the totality to search cell phones. United States v. Fisher, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145498 (E.D. Mo. Aug. 1, 2022).*
LATimes: Police Commission sets new rules for how LAPD uses surveillance technology (“The Los Angeles Police Commission on Tuesday adopted new rules for how police can use crimefighting technologies, despite opposition from advocacy groups who said they could lead to increased surveillance of people.”)
Posted inSurveillance technology|Comments Off on LATimes: Police Commission sets new rules for how LAPD uses surveillance technology
Wired: Police Used a Baby’s DNA to Investigate Its Father for a Crime (“The blood is supposed to be used for medical purposes—these screenings identify babies with serious health issues, and they have been highly successful at reducing death and disability among children. But a public records lawsuit filed last month in New Jersey suggests these samples are also being used by police in criminal investigations. The lawsuit, filed by the state’s Office of the Public Defender and the New Jersey Monitor, a nonprofit news outlet, alleges that state police sought a newborn’s blood sample from the New Jersey Department of Health to investigate the child’s father in connection with a sexual assault from the 1990s.”)
Posted inDNA, Surveillance technology|Comments Off on Wired: Police Used a Baby’s DNA to Investigate Its Father for a Crime
A protective sweep of defendant’s apartment was reasonable on the totality despite the officers not hearing anyone inside. United States v. Turner, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144215 (W.D. Tex. Aug. 12, 2022).
“At no point did Veney voluntarily submit to a show of authority. He therefore was not seized until Officer Torres blocked his path. By then, Officer Torres could see the bulge of Veney’s gun in his waistband, and Veney does not dispute that the bulge gave Officer Torres the reasonable suspicion required for the stop and frisk that followed. See Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 27 (1968).” United States v. Veney, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 22464 (D.C. Cir. Aug. 12, 2022).*
The Fourth Amendment protects against too much indefiniteness in a subpoena duces tecum, and this one wasn’t. Walsh v. Alight Sols. LLC, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 22470 (7th Cir. Aug. 12, 2022).
“While law enforcement held the Durango for four days after the seizure before searching it pursuant to a warrant, this delay did not render the continuing seizure of the Durango unreasonable. See Donahue, 764 F.3d at 300-01 (collecting cases and holding that a five-day delay between seizure and search of a vehicle was ‘immaterial’).” United States v. Newsome, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143466 (D.N.J. Aug. 11, 2022).
Exigent circumstances justified police entry. When they arrived at defendant’s house to investigate a domestic violence call, they heard a slap or punch inside and screaming. United States v. Hearn, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 22303 (6th Cir. Aug. 9, 2022).
Ninth Circuit cases say flight from a stop, even if the stop was unreasonable, is an intervening act. United States v. Daniels, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143668 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 11, 2022).
No CoA on a Franks IAC claim where there was probable cause without the omissions. Benanti v. United States, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 22416 (6th Cir. Aug. 11, 2022),*
"If it was easy, everybody would be doing it. It isn't, and they don't." —Me
"Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but of playing a poor hand well." –Josh Billings (pseudonym of Henry Wheeler Shaw), Josh Billings on Ice, and Other Things (1868) (erroneously attributed to Robert Louis Stevenson, among others)
“I am still learning.” —Domenico Giuntalodi (but misattributed to Michelangelo Buonarroti (common phrase throughout 1500's)).
"Love work; hate mastery over others; and avoid intimacy with the government."
—Shemaya, in the Thalmud
"It is a pleasant world we live in, sir, a very pleasant world. There are bad people in it, Mr. Richard, but if there were no bad people, there would be no good lawyers."
—Charles Dickens, “The Old Curiosity Shop ... With a Frontispiece. From a Painting by Geo. Cattermole, Etc.” 255 (1848)
"A system of law that not only makes certain conduct criminal, but also lays down rules for the conduct of the authorities, often becomes complex in its application to individual cases, and will from time to time produce imperfect results, especially if one's attention is confined to the particular case at bar. Some criminals do go free because of the necessity of keeping government and its servants in their place. That is one of the costs of having and enforcing a Bill of Rights. This country is built on the assumption that the cost is worth paying, and that in the long run we are all both freer and safer if the Constitution is strictly enforced." —Williams v. Nix, 700 F. 2d 1164, 1173 (8th Cir. 1983) (Richard Sheppard Arnold, J.), rev'd Nix v. Williams, 467 US. 431 (1984).
"The criminal goes free, if he must, but it is the law that sets him free. Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws, or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence." —Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 659 (1961).
"Any costs the exclusionary rule are costs imposed directly by the Fourth Amendment."
—Yale Kamisar, 86 Mich.L.Rev. 1, 36 n. 151 (1987).
"There have been powerful hydraulic pressures throughout our history that bear heavily on the Court to water down constitutional guarantees and give the police the upper hand. That hydraulic pressure has probably never been greater than it is today." — Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 39 (1968) (Douglas, J., dissenting).
"The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their property." —Entick v. Carrington, 19 How.St.Tr. 1029, 1066, 95 Eng. Rep. 807 (C.P. 1765)
"It is a fair summary of history to say that the safeguards of liberty have frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people. And so, while we are concerned here with a shabby defrauder, we must deal with his case in the context of what are really the great themes expressed by the Fourth Amendment." —United States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56, 69 (1950) (Frankfurter, J., dissenting)
"The course of true law pertaining to searches and seizures, as enunciated here, has not–to put it mildly–run smooth." —Chapman v. United States, 365 U.S. 610, 618 (1961) (Frankfurter, J., concurring).
"A search is a search, even if it happens to disclose nothing but the bottom of a turntable." —Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 325 (1987)
"For the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. ... But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected." —Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967)
“Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” —United States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1925) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)
“Liberty—the freedom from unwarranted intrusion by government—is as easily lost through insistent nibbles by government officials who seek to do their jobs too well as by those whose purpose it is to oppress; the piranha can be as deadly as the shark.” —United States v. $124,570, 873 F.2d 1240, 1246 (9th Cir. 1989)
"You can't always get what you want / But if you try sometimes / You just might find / You get what you need." —Mick Jagger & Keith Richards, Let it Bleed (album, 1969)
"In Germany, they first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Catholic. Then they came for me–and by that time there was nobody left to speak up."
—Martin Niemöller (1945) [he served seven years in a concentration camp]
“Children grow up thinking the adult world is ordered, rational, fit for purpose. It’s crap. Becoming a man is realising that it’s all rotten. Realising how to celebrate that rottenness, that’s freedom.” – John le Carré, The Night Manager (1993), line by Richard Roper
"The point of the Fourth Amendment, which often is not grasped by zealous officers, is not that it denies law enforcement the support of the usual inferences which reasonable men draw from evidence. Its protection consists in requiring that those inferences be drawn by a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being judged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime." —Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 13-14 (1948)
The book was dedicated in the first (1982) and sixth (2025) editions to Justin William Hall (1975-2025). He was three when this project started in 1978.
