The Fourth Amendment does not require a warrant be provided at the time of arrest, and an arrest can occur with probable cause and without a warrant in felony cases. Mister v. Marino, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33508 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 19, 2026).
Plaintiff may not “back door” his conviction by a § 1983 action that’s barred by Heck v. Humphrey and also by the statute of limitations. Sheffey v. Nev. Dep’t of Corr., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33528 (D. Nev. Feb. 19, 2026).*
Defendant’s guilty plea waived his search claim, and he’d lose on the merits anyway. People v. Brown, 2026 NY Slip Op 00984 (1st Dept. Feb. 19, 2026).*
The officers had arguable probable cause to arrest plaintiff, and that defeats his false arrest claim. Cook v. Brooks, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 4962 (11th Cir. Feb. 19, 2026).*
“Applying those principles here, we conclude that, under the totality of the circumstances, defendant was seized, at the latest, at 8:53 a.m., when Smith’s questions changed from general questions about defendant’s or P’s identity, to more probing questions about what defendant and P’s plans were. Put differently, at that point, a reasonable person in defendant’s situation would have felt that their movement was restricted by Smith. Several factors lead us to that conclusion. …” State v. Acosta Parra, 347 Or. App. 216 (Feb. 19, 2026).
The encounter started with consent. Officers developed reasonable suspicion for a longer detention, despite later concluding that defendant wasn’t involved in the alleged criminal activity that brought them out. United States v. Dougherty, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33961 (D.S.D. Feb. 17, 2026).*
Plaintiff wife has no Art. III standing to sue over husband’s arrest. Garcia v. City of McAllen, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33902 (S.D. Tex. Jan. 16, 2026).*
In an immigration detention case, the government’s failure to respond to the petitioner’s Fourth and Fifth Amendment arguments was waiver. Eduardo R.P. v. Bondi, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33634 (D. Minn. Feb. 17, 2026).*
Coercing a suspect out of his home for a warrantless arrest violates Payton. [But here, the error is harmless on the murder and assault charges.] People v. Shaw, 2026 NY Slip Op 00961, 2026 N.Y. LEXIS 130 (Feb. 19, 2026):
The financial reporting requirements for real estate transactions under the Bank Secrecy Act satisfy the statutory requirements which are more onerous than the Fourth Amendment requires under Shultz. Therefore, there’s no Fourth Amendment violation. An inquiry can be made, as with administrative warrants, with just official curiosity. Fid. Nat’l Fin., Inc. v. Bessent, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33478 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 19, 2026):
Begging the question: What consequences are there for a Franks violation, besides a Franks hearing and maybe just suppression of evidence? Or here, return of the evidence? Rebuke? Prosecution for false statement or worse? See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 (false statement to federal officer) & 1621 (perjury).
Affidavit for search warrant was improperly admitted into evidence of guilt at trial. It was full of hearsay and the burden for probable cause is too low for reasonable doubt. Also, admitting a video violated the confrontation clause. State v. Smith, 2026-Ohio-552, 2026 Ohio App. LEXIS 601 (8th Dist. Feb. 13, 2026):
Pole camera observation didn’t violate the Oregon Constitution. State v. Lane, 347 Or. App. 229 (Feb. 19, 2026).
Probable cause developed after the stop but before the search under the automobile exception. There was also consent. United States v. Camorlinga, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32720 (D. Or. Feb. 18, 2026).*
Defendant’s stop for speeding led to smelling marijuana and a search. Five days later, officers observed him doing an apparent hand-to-hand transaction. There was probable cause for both searches. United States v. Tucker, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32781 (D.S.C. Feb. 18, 2026).*
Defendant’s motion to suppress that alleges no facts as to his arrest allegedly without probable cause states essentially nothing. People v. Honyghan, 2026 NY Slip Op 50154 (N.Y. Co. Feb. 5, 2026).*
A search warrant return outside the state law time limit by law is not a Franks issue. United States v. Davis, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33100 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 18, 2026).
Plaintiff “fails to specifically address, and thus waives any challenge to, the district court’s determination that a favorable finding on his Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment interrogation, Sixth Amendment, and general due process claims would necessarily imply the invalidity of his state conviction or sentence.” Goodson v. City of Dallas, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 4837 (5th Cir. Feb. 18, 2026).*
Plaintiff is a convicted sex offender on probation. He was left on GPS monitoring for years too long. His claim is a state claim, not a Fourth Amendment claim. Wroblewski v. Schroeder, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33090 (W.D. Wis. Feb. 17, 2026).*
Officers had a court order under Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 8100 for taking plaintiff’s guns because of a mental health hold. They came to his house but he was gone. They talked to him through his Ring doorbell. His therapist made the call that started it. They got the guns from him. Case over the guns dismissed. Hill v. L.A. Cty. Sheriff’s Dep’t, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31135 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 11, 2026).*
“The warrant limits the digital search to electronic devices and files ‘constituting evidence of sexual exploitation of children,’ not a full forensic search of every device and file as Mr. Quinlan asserts. Although the warrant lacks a temporal limitation, the constituting evidence of language distinguishes this warrant from the Galpin warrant found to lack particularity for failure to ‘provid[e] the forensic examiner with any guidance or limitations as to what kinds of files might be relevant.’ … Although the language of the warrant issued here could have been drafted more artfully, the court finds the limiting language sufficiently connects the items to be seized to the crime of sexual exploitation of children.” United States v. Quinlan, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30725 (D. Vt. Feb. 13, 2026).*
Reason: Was It a Coincidental Traffic Stop or AI-Powered Surveillance? by Mattha Busby (“Seth Ferranti was driving his Ford pickup on a southeastern Nebraska stretch of the interstate in November 2024 when law enforcement pulled him over, claiming that he had wobbled onto the hard shoulder. As the Seward County sheriff’s deputies questioned Ferranti, a filmmaker who had spent 21 years in prison for distributing LSD, they allegedly smelled cannabis. Declaring this probable cause for a search, they searched the vehicle and discovered more than 400 pounds of marijuana. But were those the actual reasons for the stop and search? When Ferranti went on trial, his attorneys presented a license plate reader report produced by the security communications company Motorola Solutions. It revealed Ferranti had been consistently monitored prior to his arrest, including by the local sheriff on the day he was apprehended.”)
Posted inAI|Comments Off on Reason: Was It a Coincidental Traffic Stop or AI-Powered Surveillance?
NPR: Some cities are ditching license plate readers over immigration surveillance concerns by Jude Joffe-Block (“The use of automatic license plate readers has exploded across the country in recent years. The cameras on roads and freeways that take images of the back of passing cars are popular with police for solving crimes. But as President Trump’s immigration enforcement crackdown has escalated in recent months, residents of various American cities are urging local leaders to stop using these cameras, citing fears of mass surveillance and concerns that local data could be aiding a federal deportation dragnet. Many of the grassroots campaigns have targeted cameras made by Flock Safety, an Atlanta-based company that has contracts with more than 5,000 law enforcement agencies across the country. Some cities have grappled with the issue and decided to keep their cameras due to public safety, but in a number of places, the pressure has worked. The liberal college towns of Flagstaff, Ariz., Cambridge, Mass., Eugene, Ore. and Santa Cruz, Calif., are among a list of at least 30 localities that have either deactivated their Flock cameras or canceled their contracts since the beginning of 2025 – with much of the activity happening in just the last three months.”)
Posted inAutomatic license plate readers|Comments Off on NPR: Some cities are ditching license plate readers over immigration surveillance concerns
It’s not constitutionally required to show that a cell phone was actually used in a crime for probable cause to search it. It’s enough that it likely could have. “A law enforcement-affiant’s personal expertise combined with attestation to a defendant’s membership in a criminal enterprise and ‘familiar[ity] with the manner in which gang members and individuals engaged in violent crime use cell phones in connection with such activity’ can establish probable cause for a cellphone warrant.” quoting United States v. Silva, 146 F.4th 183, 186, 192-93 (2d Cir. 2025). United States v. Rodriguez, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31991 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 17, 2026).
When an officer fires his gun, any person hit is “seized.” Kilnapp v. City of Cleveland, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 4817 (6th Cir. Feb. 18, 2026).
The record is undeveloped to make a determination whether the exclusionary rule should be applied. Remanded to the trial court for further hearings. People v. Conley, 2026 Mich. App. LEXIS 1330 (Feb. 9, 2026) (unpublished).*
Defendant pulled his car into a convenient driveway for his stop, but he had no standing in the curtilage because it wasn’t his place. The car he had standing in, but this was a plain view. State v. Gunn, 2026 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 75 (Crim. App. Feb. 18, 2026).
The stop for a traffic offense ripened into reasonable suspicion for further investigation as the officer followed up a tip. State v. Williams, 2026 N.C. App. LEXIS 92 (Feb. 18, 2026).*
“Based on these principles and the totality of the circumstances, we discern no error in the district court’s determination that the officers here had reasonable suspicion to support Jenkins’s seizure. The officers received their tip from an individual who made his report in person and provided the officers with all of his personal identifying information. The basis of informant’s knowledge–his presence with Jenkins throughout the day, knowledge of the firearm’s location, and awareness of the corroborating timing of his suspicions-supported his tip’s reliability. Finally, the officers corroborated several aspects of the tip before detaining Jenkins.” United States v. Jenkins, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 4795 (4th Cir. Feb. 18, 2026).*
The inherent dangers in a traffic stop justified the officer doing a protective sweep to seize a firearm on the seat in plain view, despite lack of any sense that defendant was going to use it. Commonwealth v. Hawkins-Davenport, 2026 Pa. LEXIS 266 (Feb. 18, 2026), affirming Commonwealth v. Hawkins-Davenport, 319 A.3d 537 (Pa. Super. 2024):
A motion to suppress once made and denied doesn’t have to be renewed during the proof. Trial counsel’s statement that the ruling was correct didn’t bind appellate counsel to raise it, but it loses on the merits anyway. Cobb v. State, 2026 Ark. App. 109 (Feb. 18, 2026).
Plaintiff pled guilty to his offense and then tried a § 1983 case. The court can’t say that it is conclusively barred by Heck at this point. See Haring v. Prosise, 462 U.S. 306 (1983). Brewster v. Virginia, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31703 (W.D. Va. Feb. 17, 2026).*
By collective knowledge, the officers had probable cause to make a warrantless arrest. United States v. Estrada, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31528 (N.D. Tex. Feb. 16, 2026).*
Defendant’s lane change that affected other cars was sufficient for a stop. Claypoole v. State, 2026 Ark. App. 107 (Feb. 18, 2026).*
“This case arises from an officer shooting the target of a search warrant. Detective Thomas Strode obtained a warrant to search Don Clark’s residence for illegal guns and drugs. As officers entered without knocking, Clark shot at the officers but missed. Officer Nicholas Manasco shot and killed Clark. Clark’s family sued Strode, Manasco, and the City of St. Louis, alleging violations of the Fourth Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment, and state law. The officers and the City moved for summary judgment. None of the evidence Clark’s family submitted is sufficient to establish that Strode’s warrant lacked probable cause (and that he knew or should have known that), nor that a reasonable officer in Manasco’s position would have been required not to use deadly force. The Court grants the motion for summary judgment.” Clark v. City of St. Louis, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30695 (E.D. Mo. Feb. 13, 2026).*
This was a search warrant for indicia of defendant’s residence. State v. Uranga, 2026 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 20 (Feb. 13, 2026) (§ 56.18 n.2).
Defendant was tried in 2012 and if his counsel had made a motion to suppress cell phone data before Carpenter in 2018, he would have lost because the state courts held there was no reasonable expectation of privacy back then. Therefore, no ineffective assistance of counsel in 2012. Bradford v. State, 2026 Ga. LEXIS 52 (Feb. 17, 2026).*
Defendant’s Franks challenge fails. She complained of three omissions, but probable cause was shown anyway. Also, “Ultimately, it was appropriate for the magistrate to consider the information provided by unnamed DHHS workers when determining whether probable cause supported the issuance of the warrant.” People v. White, 2026 Mich. App. LEXIS 1306 (Feb. 13, 2026).*
Cleveland’s city elevator inspector got permission from the maintenance persons at three apartment buildings in Cleveland to conduct regular inspections. This was all by consent. The court thus does not have to decide whether the inspections were also valid as a part of a regulatory scheme. City of Cleveland v. Shaker Heights Apartments Owner LLC, 2026-Ohio-449 (8th Dist. Feb. 12, 2026).*
Officers got a tip that defendant was a drug dealer. They set up surveillance. She didn’t leave the house much at all and she had two cars, one with an out of state plate, and surveillance cameras. That suggested to them she was a drug dealer. Then they did a trash pull finding marijuana and used paraphernalia. That was probable cause for a warrant. State v. Revuelta, 2026 UT App 21 (Feb. 12, 2026).*
Defendant had fled police before. This time, they followed until he stopped and got out of the car, and they approached the passenger who denied knowing him. This involved a reasonable plain view and protective sweep of the car. Jones v. State, 2026 Fla. App. LEXIS 1259 (Fla. 6th DCA Feb. 13, 2026).*
The stop was justified, but the stop was unreasonably extended for the drug dog that didn’t alert. Then the officers muted their microphones for 40 seconds before a search of defendant’s person. “The officers’ choice to spend several minutes on off-microphone discussions after completing all traffic-related tasks embodies the type of ‘bonus time to pursue an unrelated criminal investigation’ that must be scrutinized under Rodriguez.” United States v. Gray, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30918 (D. Conn. Feb. 15, 2026).
The search here was supported by plain view and smell of alcohol. Widgeon v. Commonwealth, 2026 Va. App. LEXIS 103 (Feb. 17, 2026).*
Under state law, an unmade motion to suppress would have to clearly have succeeded to be ineffective assistance of counsel for not making it. Here, it would have failed on the merits because there was nexus. Chapple v. State, 2026 Ga. LEXIS 55 (Feb. 17, 2026).*
"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.
