CNS: Can police secretly spy on your home without a warrant? The First Circuit doesn’t know

CNS: Can police secretly spy on your home without a warrant? The First Circuit doesn’t know by Thomas F. Harrison:

Continue reading →
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on CNS: Can police secretly spy on your home without a warrant? The First Circuit doesn’t know

W.D.Okla.: An alleged victim’s vague claim a group of men ‘were after him’ is not RS

“Applying these standards, and giving deference to all inferences Officer Nitzky could reasonably have drawn in favor of the credibility of Mr. Ingram’s complaint, the Court concludes that the detention and search of Defendant at the Denny’s on December 14, 2021, was an unjustified violation of Defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights. The vague statement by Mr. Ingram that he believed a group of men ‘were after him’ is not enough, by itself, to provide a particularized and objective basis for suspecting that Defendant had committed or was about to commit a crime.” United States v. Thomas, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101408 (W.D.Okla. June 7, 2022).*

The allegedly false information will not be removed from the affidavit. Even if it was, there still is probable cause. United States v. Truett, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101448 (M.D.Tenn. June 6, 2022).*

This habeas petitioner’s claim that the search warrants for his property lacked seals and therefore must be forged fails for lack of proof that they were. That was litigated and lost. Also, defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not raising it where there’s nothing to back it up. Davison v. United States, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 15661 (6th Cir. June 7, 2022).

Posted in Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Warrant papers | Comments Off on W.D.Okla.: An alleged victim’s vague claim a group of men ‘were after him’ is not RS

StarTribune: Ex-Minneapolis officer sentenced to three years in prison for stealing drugs during traffic stops

StarTribune: Ex-Minneapolis officer sentenced to three years in prison for stealing drugs during traffic stops by Randy Furst (“A former Minneapolis police officer who conducted questionable traffic stops in order to steal people’s drugs was sentenced Wednesday in U.S. District Court in St. Paul to more than three years in federal prison. Ty Jindra, 29, was convicted last November of three counts of confiscating drugs for his own personal use and two counts of seizing drugs in violation of individuals’ constitutional rights.”)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on StarTribune: Ex-Minneapolis officer sentenced to three years in prison for stealing drugs during traffic stops

SCOTUSBlog: Court constricts, even if it does not quite eliminate, damages actions under Bivens

SCOTUSBlog: Court constricts, even if it does not quite eliminate, damages actions under Bivens by Howard M. Wasserman:

Continue reading →
Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, SCOTUS | Comments Off on SCOTUSBlog: Court constricts, even if it does not quite eliminate, damages actions under Bivens

D.Me.: Dropbox CP search reported to NCMEC wasn’t exceeded by police

Dropbox reported child pornography to NCMEC, and its search did not exceed Dropbox’s private search. United States v. Orne, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100146 (D.Me. June 6, 2022).*

The wiretap application is based on overwhelming probable cause. United States v. Burke, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100432 (N.D.Ill. June 6, 2022).*

The entry to defendant’s home was by consent, and the subsequent limited search was by consent. The officers had probable cause for a warrant at that point, and defendant consented to avoid a larger more intensive search. United States v. Myles, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100881 (N.D.Ga. Apr. 13, 2022),* adopted 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100793 (N.D.Ga. June 6, 2022).*

There was probable cause for the automobile exception search of defendant’s car. United States v. Jones, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100883 (N.D.Ga. June 6, 2022).*

Posted in Automobile exception, Consent, Independent source, Private search | Comments Off on D.Me.: Dropbox CP search reported to NCMEC wasn’t exceeded by police

HI: DWI stop not “custody”, and statements made during FST were admissible

Defendant was not in custody at the time she made statements during a FST. State v. Sagapolutele-Silva, 2022 Haw. LEXIS 85 (June 3, 2022); State v. Manion, 2022 Haw. LEXIS 86 (June 3, 2022).

Defendant’s claim that her daughter was coerced into providing the passcode to the cell phone was not developed and is treated as waived. Guidry v. State, 2022 Nev. LEXIS 38 (June 2, 2022).*

Summary judgment was not proper here because there were factual issues for trial that the plaintiffs were detained without reasonable suspicion. Shaw v. Schulte, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 15468 (10th Cir. June 6, 2022).*

Posted in Consent, Custody, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on HI: DWI stop not “custody”, and statements made during FST were admissible

NYT: How a New York County Used the State’s ‘Red Flag’ Law to Seize 160 Guns

NYT: How a New York County Used the State’s ‘Red Flag’ Law to Seize 160 Guns by Andy Newman, Benjamin Weiser and Ashley Southall (“Suffolk County on Long Island aggressively uses the law to take guns from people in crisis in an effort to prevent shootings and suicides. Its experience could inform a national debate.”).

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on NYT: How a New York County Used the State’s ‘Red Flag’ Law to Seize 160 Guns

New article: Unintentional Destruction: Torres v. Madrid, in Defining a Fourth Amendment Seizure of the Person as a Common Law Arrest, Turned Terry v. Ohio into Collateral Damage,

George M. Dery III, Unintentional Destruction: Torres v. Madrid, in Defining a Fourth Amendment Seizure of the Person as a Common Law Arrest, Turned Terry v. Ohio into Collateral Damage, 49 Hastings Const. L.Q. 83 (2022), Abstract:

Continue reading →
Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Seizure | Comments Off on New article: Unintentional Destruction: Torres v. Madrid, in Defining a Fourth Amendment Seizure of the Person as a Common Law Arrest, Turned Terry v. Ohio into Collateral Damage,

S.D.Miss.: Taint team after a SW isn’t a judicial function, rejecting Baltimore Law Firm

This district court rejects, as has S.D.N.Y., the Art. III function of filter teams reviewing searches of Baltimore Law Firm. (In re Search Warrant Issued June 13, 2019 (“Baltimore Law Firm”), 942 F.3d 159, 170-71 (4th Cir. 2019)). Too much work; court should see privileged stuff. [What about a Magistrate or special master?] United States v. Ritchey, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99335 (S.D.Miss. June 3, 2022).

The officer admittedly was interested in drugs during this traffic stop, and that made the questions unrelated to the traffic ticket an unreasonable extension of the stop. United States v. Parks, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99662 (W.D.N.Y. June 3, 2022).

Counting prior revocations of DLs as offenses for DWI violates Birchfield. State v. Forrett, 2022 WI 37, 2022 Wisc. LEXIS 51 (June 3, 2022).*

Posted in Privileges, Reasonable suspicion, Warrant execution | Comments Off on S.D.Miss.: Taint team after a SW isn’t a judicial function, rejecting Baltimore Law Firm

D.Ariz.: Nighttime search rule doesn’t bar nighttime arrest warrant execution

As to arrest warrants, Rule 41 and 21 U.S.C. § 879 aren’t clear on whether a nighttime entry is barred for execution of an arrest warrant. (Tie goes to the government on reasonableness.) A violation of knock-and-announce doesn’t invoke the exclusionary rule under Hudson. United States v. Borges, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99699 (D.Ariz. June 2, 2022) (R&R).

After the purposes of the traffic stop were complete, running the already at-hand drug dog around the car without reasonable suspicion unreasonably extended the stop. Dumond v. State, 2022 Ark. App. 292, 2022 Ark. App. LEXIS 300 (June 1, 2022).

Arresting defendant in the doorway of his motel room was reasonable, and safety purposes allowed officers to open the door and survey. A protective sweep would be justified. State v. Davis, 2022-Ohio-1875, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 1759 (2d Dist. June 3, 2022).*

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Dog sniff, Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.Ariz.: Nighttime search rule doesn’t bar nighttime arrest warrant execution

OH2: Warrant found during traffic stop justified search of person

Defendant was stopped for a traffic offense, and a warrant surfaced. That justified a search incident of his person. State v. Fleming, 2022-Ohio-1876, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 1749 (2d Dist. June 3, 2022).

Plaintiff’s claim on appeal that probable cause was lacking was a conclusory sentence without development, and it is treated as waived. Montoya v. City & Cnty. of Denver, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 15338 (10th Cir. June 3, 2022).*

When out of the car after a traffic stop, raising your hands when the officer asks for a patdown is consent. United States v. Kennedy, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 15313 (8th Cir. June 3, 2022).*

Posted in Consent, Search incident, Waiver | Comments Off on OH2: Warrant found during traffic stop justified search of person

M.D.Ga.: Dropping cell phone in flight from wrecked car is abandonment

A series of alleged crimes and other actions of the defendant was probable cause to search defendant’s phone found in his car. [There is no nexus to the crimes mentioned in the opinion, so I submit it’s wrong on this point.] But, that doesn’t matter because defendant dropped the phone in flight from his wrecked car, and that’s abandonment. United States v. Hester, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98875 (M.D.Ga. June 2, 2022) (it’s abandonment of the car, too).

Knock-and-talk in South Carolina requires reasonable suspicion to approach the door, and here it was lacking. State v. Ferguson, 2022 S.C. App. LEXIS 60 (June 1, 2022).

The exclusionary rule does not apply to revocation of supervised release. United States v. Wright, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 15296 (11th Cir. June 3, 2022).*

Posted in Abandonment, Exclusionary rule, Knock and talk, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on M.D.Ga.: Dropping cell phone in flight from wrecked car is abandonment

E.D.Tenn.: Finding ammo not matching seized firearm justifies further search

Officers finding ammunition from a different caliber gun than the one found justifies a further search. United States v. Berry, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98684 (E.D.Tenn. May 3, 2022), adopted, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98639 (E.D.Tenn. June 2, 2022).

Plaintiff’s detention on a mental health hold because of threats of suicide resulted in her being forcibly removed from a car when she resisted. This was not unreasonable force. Hoogland v. City of Maryville, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 15201 (6th Cir. June 1, 2022).*

Administrative subpoenas can be so burdensome they amount to a Fourth Amendment violation, but these are reasonable. In re Admin. Baptist Med. Ctr. & Missouri Baptist Hospital-Sullivan on September 29, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98583 (E.D.Mo. June 2, 2022).

Posted in Excessive force, Search incident, Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters | Comments Off on E.D.Tenn.: Finding ammo not matching seized firearm justifies further search

D.Iowa: CA8 probably wouldn’t adopt CA5’s private search foreseeability element

A foreseeability requirement in the private search doctrine, apparently applicable in the Fifth Circuit is not followed in this district court in the Eighth Circuit. United States v. Hayes, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98528 (D.Iowa June 2, 2022):

Continue reading →
Posted in Private search | Comments Off on D.Iowa: CA8 probably wouldn’t adopt CA5’s private search foreseeability element

D.Ore.: Officer can be cross-examined at trial on his SW affidavit

The government’s motion in limine against crossing the IRS agent on his search warrant affidavit is denied. The search has already been litigated, and defendant can’t use this as a “mini-Franks hearing.” The government can object if it goes far afield. United States v. Motions, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98542 (D.Ore. June 2, 2022).

Defendant dropped or tossed a gun in flight from police. He claims it was because an illegal arrest was coming, but he loses. “The law makes clear that Durham was not under arrest at the time and had no reasonable expectation of privacy in a gun that police saw on the ground. Nothing in the Fourth Amendment requires officers to avert their eyes from evidence a suspect reveals to them in public.” United States v. Durham, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97541 (W.D.Ky. June 1, 2022).*

The traffic stop was valid, and a gun was in plain view inside. United States v. McKenzie, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 15035 (May 31, 2022).*

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on D.Ore.: Officer can be cross-examined at trial on his SW affidavit

CA3: Customs searches occur to and from VI; here bag was put into baggage claim to see who claimed it

Customs can search bags coming to and from the Virgin Islands. Here, bags on an airplane were searched and it was returned to baggage claim to see who picked it up, and that was reasonable. United States v. Forde, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 15168 (3d Cir. June 1, 2022).

A dog sniff by one officer while the other was completing computer checks and citation paperwork did not extend the stop. Even if, the CI’s information was reasonable suspicion. United States v. Stamper, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98311 (W.D.N.C. June 2, 2022).*

Surveillance of one man’s Kik App led to information about defendant’s interest and child porn, and that led to a valid search of defendant’s computers. United States v. Chiu, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 15204 (1st Cir. June 1, 2022).*

Posted in Border search, Dog sniff | Comments Off on CA3: Customs searches occur to and from VI; here bag was put into baggage claim to see who claimed it

MO: Inventory followed policy without putting it into evidence

The officer testified his inventory followed policy, but no written policy was admitted into evidence. It was up to the trial court to believe the officer on policy or not, and it did. State v. Teel, 2022 Mo. App. LEXIS 340 (May 31, 2022).

The affidavit for warrant here failed to show nexus. “In this case, it does not appear that the police conducted surveillance to determine how long the unknown male and female remained at the premises and the affidavit provided no information about the time of day they went inside. Nor is any information included about the ownership of the residence or whether the driver’s license information for the female to whom the car was registered matched a description of the unknown female who entered the residence. Finally, nothing in the affidavit shows that either occupant of the vehicle carried something believed to be illegal drugs into the residence. Based upon the totality of the particular facts and circumstances of this case, we conclude that there was not a substantial basis for concluding that probable cause existed to search the residence. … Accordingly, the trial court erred by denying this portion of Medina-Hernandez’s motion to suppress.” Medina-Hernandez v. State, 2022 Ga. App. LEXIS 264 (June 1, 2022).*

Posted in Inventory, Nexus | Comments Off on MO: Inventory followed policy without putting it into evidence

GA: Court ordered 4A waiver for probation doesn’t make the sentence void

Trial court’s imposition of a Fourth Amendment waiver did not make the sentence void. Gainey v. State, 2022 Ga. App. LEXIS 261 (June 1, 2022).

The defense, of course, cannot get a search warrant for the contents of a cell phone, but he or she make seek a court order for production of its contents if it can show something more than speculation. The claim that Brady information will be on the phone here is speculative, and production is denied. People v. Dominicci, 2022 NY Slip Op 22173, 2022 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2332 (Bronx Co. May 5, 2022).

Remember “supply chain” issues during Covid? Drug lawyers sometimes referred to a substantial bust as a “supply chain” issue. Then in this case, “With the help of a cooperating suspect, the investigation led up the supply chain to Defendant. Law enforcement executed a search warrant on Defendant’s residence, seizing almost a kilogram of heroin, drug packaging materials, digital scales, a 9 mm handgun, five rounds of ammunition, and about $28,000 in cash.” United States v. Lopez-Diaz, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97102 (D.Ore. May 31, 2022).*

Posted in Cell phones, Probation / Parole search, Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters | Comments Off on GA: Court ordered 4A waiver for probation doesn’t make the sentence void

E.D.Pa.: Stop without RS still leads to PC and no exclusion

The stop was without reasonable suspicion, but the court finds the subsequent search incident based on probable cause from the stop reasonable and refuses to apply the exclusionary rule. United States v. Harris, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97002 (E.D.Pa. May 31, 2022):

Continue reading →
Posted in Exclusionary rule, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on E.D.Pa.: Stop without RS still leads to PC and no exclusion

techdirt: Ninth Circuit Takes Another Look At NSLs, Says Indefinite Gag Orders Still Aren’t Constitutional Problem

techdirt: Ninth Circuit Takes Another Look At NSLs, Says Indefinite Gag Orders Still Aren’t Constitutional Problem by Tim Cushing:

Continue reading →
Posted in Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters | Comments Off on techdirt: Ninth Circuit Takes Another Look At NSLs, Says Indefinite Gag Orders Still Aren’t Constitutional Problem