An anonymous 911 call about drug dealing at a Chicago intersection corroborated by officers’ observations was reasonable suspicion under Navarette. The caller also said she’d be calling back and 911 captured the number. There was little risk the caller couldn’t be identified. United States v. Watson, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143264 (N.D.Ill. Aug. 2, 2021).
Defendant was suspected to have traveled interstate with a minor for sex. Her electronics were traced to locate them, and he lacks standing to contest that. Warrantless tracking of his CSLI was reasonable based on exigent circumstances, even under Carpenter. United States v. Boukamp, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143389 (N.D.Tex. July 29, 2021).
“The fact that Burno’s Fourth Amendment challenges were not successful in the state court proceedings does not provide a basis for this Court to disregard Stone, and Burno’s Fourth Amendment claim is not reviewable.” 2254 claims. Burno v. Wetzel, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143495 (E.D.Pa. Aug. 2, 2021).*
Defendant’s cell phone location information search was reasonable and constitutional under federal law despite an alleged violation of state law. United States v. Coles, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143548 (M.D.Pa. Aug. 2, 2021).
There was probable cause for the search warrant for defendant’s house from controlled buys with a CI. After each, defendant went back to his place, creating an inference more drugs would be there. State v. Collins, 2021 Conn. App. LEXIS 264 (Aug. 3, 2021).*
Officers conducting a welfare check on a car in a Waffle House parking lot with the engine running for two hours woke the driver (not the passenger) and got him out to check on him. In plain view was a gun. That reasonably led to a further search. United States v. Greene, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 22671 (6th Cir. July 29, 2021).*
NJ declines to adopt a reasonable mistake of law justification for an automobile stop and resulting search. At issue was a traffic law barring license plate frames that cover information on the plate that resulted in 100,000 stops per year. The stop (and most of the others) were clearly pretextual. Here “Garden State” was 10-15% covered, and that’s all. The identifying information on the license plate is all visible. The court discusses Heien at length and chooses not to follow it under state law. State v. Carter, 2021 N.J. LEXIS 787 (Aug. 2, 2021).
The continuation of this stop was reasonable as officers tried to contact the owner of the car, allegedly 30 seconds away who didn’t respond to calls. A plain view justified a search at first. When the owner didn’t reply, officers arranged for a tow, and that resulted in an inventory. The officer admitted at the hearing that he misspoke in the report that all the searches were a result of an inventory. United States v. Sharp, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143293 (N.D.Ohio Aug. 2, 2021).*
Defendant was an overnight guest in the home of another when police arrived with a search warrant. Her purse was reasonably searched under the warrant. United States v. Gaitor, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143136 (E.D.Tenn. July 31, 2021).*
CNN: Florida judge orders destruction of suppressed video evidence in Robert Kraft case by Rebekah Riess, Gregory Lemos & Amir Vera (“A Palm Beach County, Florida, judge ordered the destruction of video evidence previously suppressed in the case against New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft, according to court documents. Judge Leonard Hanser on Friday ordered that the “state shall destroy the suppressed evidence forthwith and submit documentation to this Court outlining the steps it took to comply,” records show.”)
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on CNN: Florida judge orders destruction of suppressed video evidence in Robert Kraft case
Years old information of drug dealing in another county coupled with a trash pull of recent drug use (not trafficking) was stale, and the search warrant was clearly lacking probable cause. Therefore, the good faith exception does not apply. State v. Martin, 2021-Ohio-2599, 2021 Ohio App. LEXIS 2588 (1st Dist. July 30, 2021) (2-1).
A trooper’s traffic stop of defendant based on the community caretaking function was based on a report that the driver had just fallen asleep at an intersection. Texas applies both subjective and objective review of community caretaking function stops, and this satisfied both. Ramirez v. State, 2021 Tex. App. LEXIS 6136 (Tex. App. – El Paso July 30, 2021).
The time it took to complete the traffic stop, all things considered, was reasonable on the totality, and the dog sniff completed by the 18 minute mark didn’t extend it. State v. Jones, 2021-Ohio-2621, 2021 Ohio App. LEXIS 2578 (6th Dist. July 30, 2021).*
WaPo: Opinion: Privacy is a fiction in the Internet age. A priest’s case proves it. (“The top administrator of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops resigned last month after a newsletter used data from his cellphone to confirm his use of the dating app Grindr and track his movements to gay bars. Questions about hypocrisy aside, this invasion of an individual’s intimate life should be alarming when it happens to anyone — yet it could easily happen to everyone.”)
Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in a contraband cell phone found on him in prison. The contents of the phone were used in a drug distribution indictment. The government got a search warrant for the contents of the phone, apparently because California state law required it for digital seizures from prisoners [not that it would matter in federal court by Virginia v. Moore]. United States v. Bash, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143002 (E.D.Cal. July 28, 2021).
The entry here was reasonable at the time it happened. Caniglia v. Strom and Sanders v. United States were decided after the case was submitted on appeal. Therefore, qualified immunity applies. Boggs v. Pearson, 2021 SD 44, 2021 S.D. LEXIS 85 (July 30, 2021).
“McColley fails to identify a Fourth Amendment violation in this encounter. The initial traffic stop was permissible because Frantz had reasonable suspicion to believe that McColley was violating Kan. Stat. Ann. § 8-1523, and Frantz’s questioning while checking McColley’s documents in his patrol vehicle did not unreasonably extend the traffic stop. Once the initial stop ended, McColley consented to additional questions and then to the search of his car. As a result, the evidence obtained from this encounter will not be suppressed.” United States v. McColley, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143064 (D.Kan. July 30, 2021).*
Where defendant turned over his DL when the officer requested it and it wasn’t returned right away while records were checked, it was [apparently] on defendant to ask for it back. This wasn’t a seizure. United States v. Lillich, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 22466 (8th Cir. July 29, 2021):
“Turning to the facts of the instant case, the Court must resolve the central question: did Nations see Defendant commit a traffic violation? Having listened to Nations’ testimony, observed him in open court, and reviewed the video and written transcript and narrative, the Court finds that he did. As such, the Court does not address whether the tip provided an independent basis for reasonable suspicion.” United States v. Zeno, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140967 (M.D.La. July 28, 2021).*
The affidavit for warrant showed that defendant’s drug operation was ongoing, so it was not stale by the time the warrant issued. “Given that the anonymous tip was substantially corroborated as to some of its details, Maldanado and Newman were justified in their reliance on the other portions of the anonymous tip — in light of the totality of the information in the supporting affidavit — in arriving at probable cause and applying for the search warrant.” Also, the ambiguity when a controlled buy occurred wasn’t determinative. United States v. Strange, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140584 (E.D.N.C. July 28, 2021).*
A user of defendant’s computer found apparent child pornography in the recycle bin of defendant’s computer, and that was relayed to the police who had probable cause for a search warrant. Hutcheson v. State, 2021 Ga. App. LEXIS 401 (July 28, 2021).*cf
The search warrant affidavit here could have been relevant to the drug quantity calculation, and defendant should have put it into evidence at sentencing. United States v. Rollerson, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 22622 (7th Cir. July 30, 2021).
Defendant was on mandatory probation and that included a search condition he had to live with. It facilitates the legislature’s stated goals of rehabilitation of offenders. People v. Bryant, 2021 Cal. LEXIS 5260 (July 29, 2021).
There was probable cause for defendant’s arrest, and there was unequivocal abandonment of both a firearm and the vehicle defendant was in. United States v. Felix, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141767 (D.V.I. July 29, 2021).*
The state trooper that stopped defendant for an objective traffic violation apparently had subjective motivation to look for other crimes, but his subjective motives aren’t determinative of anything. United States v. Fagan, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141949 (D. Maine July 29, 2021).
The car defendant was in was unreasonably stopped and searched, and this led to a search of the house. The unconstitutionality of the car search taints the house search because the house search isn’t attenuated. “The Court finds that there was no intervening circumstance in this case. Cpl. Barnett draws a direct causal nexus between the identity of Fields and the decision to search near the house. His testimony in no way indicates that the fruits of the search of the car led him to search near the house.” United States v. Fields, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141887 (M.D.La. July 29, 2021).*
Defendant’s vehicle was parked partly in the roadway, and that was reasonable suspicion for a stop. State v. McGrath, 2021-Ohio-2605, 2021 Ohio App. LEXIS 2562 (2d Dist. July 30, 2021).*
The omitted information still leaves probable cause. Here, the warrant was for cell tower location information to connect defendant to the burglary of the victims’ house while they slept. State v. Gonzalez, 2021 UT App 83, 2021 Utah App. LEXIS 84 (July 29, 2021).*
There was reasonable suspicion for prolonging the traffic stop, including the dog sniff. United States v. Garth, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141972 (D.Utah July 30, 2021).*
“The Estate does not identify any case clearly establishing that officers acting under similar circumstances-who undertook extensive efforts to deescalate a standoff yet the suspect grabbed a firearm off the ground-were held to have violated the suspect’s Fourth Amendment rights. We recognize Vent’s death represents a tragic loss. However, under our precedent, the officers were entitled to qualified immunity.” Bifelt v. Alaska, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 22652 (9th Cir. July 30, 2021).*
Defendant’s consent in the face of the officer’s threat to get a search warrant was involuntary where there was no probable cause for a warrant. State v. Cohen, 2021 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 356 (July 29, 2021).
There was reasonable suspicion for a border search of defendant’s cell phone when he arrived at O’Hare. CBP was on the lookout for defendant coming with potential possession of child pornography. United States v. Mendez, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140738 (N.D.Ill. July 28, 2021).*
A police car parking near defendant’s car and turning on the takedown lights but not emergency lights isn’t a seizure. “Officer Nelson’s use of his police vehicle’s takedown lights to illuminate the parked car—as opposed to turning on flashing emergency lights—does not change that conclusion. Other circuits have agreed that shining a bright light into a vehicle is not inherently coercive.” United States v. Tafuna, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 22442 (10th Cir. July 27, 2021).
Posted inBorder search, Cell phones, Seizure|Comments Off on TN: Consent in the face of a threat to get a SW is invalid where no PC
Defendant was driven to an ER after 2 am for having been shot. Out in the ER parking was the car with blood and guns in it. A state judge issued a search warrant for the car, and that resulted in defendant being charged with FIPF. There was probable cause, and it wasn’t required that the guns even be alleged to be involved in the altercation. United States v. Roland, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141688 (S.D.Ind. July 28, 2021).
There was reasonable suspicion for defendant’s stop. Defendant’s version of what he was doing was rejected by the USMJ as implausible. United States v. Brown, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141082 (W.D.N.Y. July 28, 2021).*
Defendant left his backpack in a parking lot and it was legally abandoned when the police obtained it and searched it. He threw it in a bush, got in a car, and drove away. United States v. Gallardo, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141678 (D.N.M. July 29, 2021).*
Carpenter did not signal SCOTUS’s abandonment of the third party doctrine to non-CSLI. United States v. Osadzinski, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141637 (N.D.Ill. July 29, 2021)*:
It is not the district court’s statutory function to consider the legality of seizure of evidence at a preliminary hearing. State v. Ayon, 2021 N.M. App. LEXIS 44 (July 27, 2021):
Tulsa police’s impoundment of defendant’s car was a pretext for an inventory search. The inventory policy didn’t even mention impoundment. United States v. Woodard, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 22443 (10th Cir. July 27, 2021):
Defendant’s mere use of the library’s parking lot and picnic table at 9 p.m. on a Sunday evening was not reasonable suspicion of some other criminal activity and did not support a stop and frisk. State v. Haughwout, 2021 Conn. LEXIS 210 (July 23, 2021).
A preliminary injunction against execution of an administrative search warrant is denied. The search had already started when it was filed, and this case doesn’t satisfy the “capable of repetition but evading review” standard. The parties agree that redacted papers in support can be released. Ace Black Ranches, LLC v. United States EPA, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138785 (D.Idaho July 23, 2021).
“The Court finds the arguments of both parties unpersuasive and holds that a reasonable suspicion standard applies to the search in this case. Contrary to Defendant’s claims, he did not have the same reasonable expectation of privacy in the items seized from his home on February 4, 2020 as would an ordinary citizen. Defendant did not object to conditions of supervised release that provided for warrantless searches of his person, premises, and vehicle. These conditions significantly lowered his privacy interest. Furthermore, Defendant’s supervising probation officer was present and initiated a search of his residence pursuant to the standard conditions of supervised release, the search complied with Defendant’s conditions of supervised release, and the search was based on reasonable suspicion. Thus, the totality of the circumstances establish that the search was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.” United States v. Johnson, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140389 (W.D.N.C. July 28, 2021).*
The exclusionary rule applies to probation revocation proceedings in Pennsylvania. Having suppressed in the underlying criminal case, the court should have suppressed on the violation of probation. Commonwealth v. Parson, 2021 PA Super 151, 2021 Pa. Super. LEXIS 487 (July 28, 2021) (2½ years from conviction to reversal).
Defendant made a prima facie showing of a Franks violation to get a hearing. The warrant authorized a search for drug evidence, but not files that ended up showing child pornography. United States v. Hannah, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139988 (C.D.Ill. July 27, 2021).*
There was probable cause to believe defendant committed the offense of wanton endangerment to justify a search warrant. The government didn’t have to show more about guilt. United States v. Brown, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 22358 (4th Cir. July 28, 2021).*
Plaintiffs had money in safe deposit boxes at United States Private Vaults. The government raided the boxes apparently with probable cause and seized the money pending forfeiture, but it offers no justification for the seizure or continuing to keep the money. Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction for return of the property under Rule 41(g) is granted because they show a likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm. Snitko v. United States, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140280 (C.D.Cal. July 23, 2021):
Posted inRule 41(g) / Return of property|Comments Off on C.D.Cal.: Money seized from safe deposit boxes ordered returned under Rule 41(g); govt offers no justification to keep it
"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.
