Defendant’s DL had the address where the police entered on an arrest warrant, and it led to a plain view. The DL address was “reason to believe” it was his address. United States v. Johnson, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 18491 (2d Cir. June 22, 2021).
Exigency from a call about a mentally unstable and likely drunk person on defendant’s porch led police to see guns through a window, and she was a felon. That led to a search warrant. United States v. Mesick, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115068 (D.Vt. June 21, 2021).*
Defendant’s 2255 pleading raises two IAC claims for failure to move to suppress something, but he shows no grounds to believe any motion to suppress would be granted or that he wouldn’t have pled guilty. Turner v. United States, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115442 (S.D. Ill. June 21, 2021).*
Three minute wait for backup officer to arrive did not unreasonably extend the stop based on the articulated justification: “Officer Carney called and waited for a cover officer so that he could safely carry out the mission of the traffic stop. He recognized Defendant from previous drug investigations, and he had recently learned from a reliable source that Defendant was dealing narcotics and carrying a firearm. Consistent with that information, Officer Carney watched Defendant make a brief visit to an apartment building known for drug activity. Additionally, Defendant’s conduct while being pulled over, i.e., parking the Jeep in a way that allowed for an easy escape and revving the engine, led Officer Carney to sensibly believe that Defendant might try to flee the scene. The situation was also complicated by the presence of the passenger in the Jeep. Given these credible safety concerns, the Court concludes that Officer Carney did not unreasonably extend the traffic stop by waiting three minutes for his backup to arrive.” United States v. Shelton, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115136 (D. Ore. June 20, 2021).
Defendant’s consent was voluntary. Although he’s a native Spanish speaker and he had a consent form in Spanish, there’s no sign he didn’t understand what he was agreeing to. United States v. Barenas-Reynoso, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115049 (N.D. Ill. June 21, 2021).*
Posted inConsent, Reasonable suspicion|Comments Off on D.Ore.: 3 min. wait for backup here did not unreasonably extend traffic stop
Based on the undisputed facts (such that a hearing isn’t required), defendant’s trash was out for collection, and no reasonable expectation of privacy was violated by searching it, and then using that information to get a search warrant. “Here, Officer Walker in his affidavit states, ‘[t]he receptacle was located at the end of the driveway near the street waiting for pickup.’ … As a result, the Court determines Mr. Bryant had no subjective expectation of privacy in the garbage that society accepts as objectively reasonable.” In addition, there were controlled buys. Defendant’s cell phones were also properly searched. United States v. Bryant, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114683 (E.D. Ark. June 21, 2021).
“Given the legal principles above, the proper question in this case is not whether the vehicle Jackson was riding in violated § 55-4-110(b), but rather, whether Officer Javins had an ‘objectively reasonable suspicion that a violation of that statute was occurring’ at the time she stopped the vehicle. … Officer Javins testified that she suspected the vehicle was violating § 55-4-110(b) solely because her headlights reflected off of a clear plastic cover on the vehicle’s registration tag, and that reflection temporarily prevented her from seeing the otherwise legible information on the tag from approximately twenty-four feet away. … The Court finds that although Officer Javins appeared to testify credibly about what she observed, the totality of the circumstances, case law, and plain language of § 55-4-110(b) all suggest that her basis for reasonable suspicion to justify the traffic stop in this case was not credible.” United States v. Jackson, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114590 (M.D. Tenn. June 16, 2021).*
Defendant has to show his standing to get access to the search warrant application under United States v. Pirk, 282 F. Supp. 3d 585, 594 (W.D.N.Y. 2017). United States v. Cobb, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114405 (W.D. N.Y. June 18, 2021).
“Ligon could not have had any subjective expectation of privacy in the packages because he did not send them and they were not addressed to him personally.” United States v. Ligon, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 18302 (6th Cir. June 17, 2021).
There was probable cause for the search warrant connecting defendant to a murder starting with an informant’s report and a co-defendant’s incriminating actions. “Moon does not contend that any of the assertions in the affidavit are untrue, only that they lack significance and, therefore, do not provide support for a search warrant.” But they do. Moon v. State, 2021 Ga. LEXIS 472 (June 21, 2021).*
Defendant was seized without reasonable suspicion when an officer acting on an informant’s tip approached him with hand on gun telling defendant to raise his hands. Seconds later, he fled, dropping the gun. The court finds an unreasonable seizure precipitated the flight and resulting abandonment. Motion to suppress granted. United States v. Dye, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114183 (D. Kan. June 18, 2021).
There was a warrant for defendant’s CSLI, so his Carpenter claim fails. Atkins v. United States, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 18152 (11th Cir. June 17, 2021).*
A second successor habeas again fails to show what about the search warrant process was newly discovered. In re Kimball, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 18185 (6th Cir. June 17, 2021).*
Finding Iowa law long recognized trespass was an unreasonable entry, the state Supreme Court holds under the state constitution that trash out for collection by the trash collector is not abandoned property, and defendant still retained a reasonable expectation of privacy in it. The court notes “Current Fourth Amendment jurisprudence is a mess.” State v. Wright, 2021 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 83 at *28 (June 18, 2021) (two other opinions the same day following it) (a truly fascinating 128 page opinion; the kind of brief I would have filed if I had any confidence in my state supreme court to go there; not an iota). See techdirt: Iowa’s Top Court Says Cops Can’t Search People’s Garbage Without A Warrant by Tim Cushing
Defendant’s post-conviction ineffectiveness claim for not raising GPS monitoring fails for mootness. Nothing from that was used at his trial. Burdick v. State, 2021 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 271 (June 18, 2021).*
The state supreme court having found defendant’s arrest unlawful, his statement during the arrest should have been suppressed. People v. Hammerlund, 2021 Mich. App. LEXIS 3773 (June 17, 2021) (2-1) (dissent).
Detention under the Material Witness Statute that was validly issued prohibits an inquiry into the subjective intent; i.e., whether they will be later indicted. In re M/V Joanna, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114281 (E.D. La. June 18, 2021).
The traffic stop being valid, the rest that flowed from it was reasonable. United States v. Mack, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 18295 (5th Cir. June 18, 2021).*
Plaintiff’s claim that his alleged false arrest was based on disputed facts doesn’t state a claim. Probable cause doesn’t require that kind of analysis. Thornton v. Lymous, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 18287 (5th Cir. June 18, 2021).*
The smell of burnt marijuana in defendant’s car was still probable cause, despite it being in a medical marijuana state. State v. Roberson, 2021 OK CR 16, 2021 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 16 (June 17, 2021):
Inventory is an exception to the warrant requirement, so the state carries the burden of proof. Here, the state failed to prove the policy, a General Order, that permitted the inventory to show that it was not a subterfuge for a criminal search. Ross v. State, 2021 Fla. App. LEXIS 9038 (Fla. 2d DCA June 18, 2021):
Wisconsin’s statute allegedly permitting blood draws of incapacitated drivers is unconstitutional for lack of actual consent, but the good faith exception saves it today. State v. Prado, 2021 WI 64, 2021 Wisc. LEXIS 98 (June 18, 2021):
The officer’s noting the search of defendant’s vehicle was incident to arrest was incorrect and not binding at the suppression hearing. It was valid as an inventory. State v. Koontz, 2021 Fla. App. LEXIS 9019 (Fla. 5th DCA June 18, 2021).
“We conclude, however, that the anonymous informants’ reliability and the basis for their knowledge was established by corroborating evidence they provided regarding details of the incident and by the description they provided of the vehicle and the individual seen fleeing the scene … and that the search warrant was supported by probable cause.” People v. Harlow, 2021 NY Slip Op 03933, 2021 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4088 (4th Dept. June 17, 2021).*
School corporal punishment claims are Fourteenth Amendment claims in this circuit, not Fourth Amendment claims. T.O. v. Fort Bend Indep. Sch. Dist., 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 18134 (5th Cir. June 17, 2021).*
Officers cannot enter a defendant’s home in hot pursuit from his failing to stop for a Terry stop on mere reasonable suspicion. United States v. Cannon, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112705 (D.N.M. June 16, 2021).
The officer’s initial observations of a host of factors of reasonable suspicion justified prolonging the stop. United States v. St. Patrick, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113339 (M.D. Pa. June 17, 2021).*
When defendant avoided a roadblock, the officers could see his LPN light was out and the plate was expired, and that justified his stop. Turner v. State, 2021 Miss. LEXIS 157 (June 17, 2021).*
Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not objecting to the search warrant because it would contradict his claim of self-defense. State v. Messenger, 2021-Ohio-2044, 2021 Ohio App. LEXIS 2017 (10th Dist. June 17, 2021) (see § 60.19)
The issue here is whether an attic separate from an apartment was a common area where the defendant’s upstairs apartment was the subject of the warrant. It could have been a common area, but the door was locked and broken into, and the state put on no proof about it being a common area. The attic part of the search is suppressed. People v. Moore, 2021 NY Slip Op 03975, 2021 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4074 (4th Dept. June 17, 2021).
Defendant’s showing up for an arranged drug deal was probable cause to search the car he was driving. With no evidence to the contrary, the vehicle is presumed mobile for the automobile exception. United States v. Sandeen, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113200 (D. Haw. June 16, 2021).*
There was justification for seizure of defendant’s cell phone in plain view because it might have evidence of a crime on it. The four month delay in obtaining a search warrant for the phone was reasonable under all the circumstances, including defendant’s diminished possessory interest and the officer’s heavy caseload. United States v. Blanchard, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113225 (D. Mass. June 16, 2021):
The officer intended only to give a warning, but it took a while for defendant’s registration to clear a computer check. While waiting, the officer checked defendant’s criminal history finding a significant meth history and then called for a drug dog. Because defendant’s paperwork wasn’t in order for a quick check, the dog did not extend the stop. State v. Britcher, 2021 Iowa App. LEXIS 479 (June 16, 2021).
The CI’s information was not corroborated and it didn’t provide sufficient predictive details to show the CI was reliable. The motion to suppress should have been granted. Williams v. State, 2021 Ga. App. LEXIS 284 (June 16, 2021).
“[T]he alleged factual misrepresentations are immaterial to the issuing judge’s probable cause determination.” The search of defendant’s car parked outside his house searched under the warrant was reasonable. United States v. Powell, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 17983 (5th Cir. June 16, 2021).*
Posted inDog sniff, Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay|Comments Off on IA: Def’s registration papers weren’t in order; while waiting on a response from dispatch, criminal history led to calling drug dog. This didn’t extend the stop
Defendant was seen at 4 am apparently casing cars in San Diego in a neighborhood where people were never on the street at that hour. The stop was based on a mere hunch, but it produced an outstanding warrant. “Although the officer who stopped and ultimately arrested him acted on no more than a hunch, detaining Kasrawi after watching him innocuously cross the street to his legally parked car, he subsequently learned that Kasrawi had an outstanding arrest warrant. Supreme Court precedent compels our conclusion that despite the Fourth Amendment violation, the evidence need not be suppressed. This case falls into a narrow exception to the exclusionary rule that applies where a law enforcement officer discovers the defendant’s outstanding warrant after an illegal stop but before a search yields evidence of a crime. Under these limited circumstances, discovery of the warrant can attenuate the taint of the original detention.” People v. Kasrawi, 2021 Cal. App. LEXIS 504 (4th Dist. June 16, 2021):
The fact the affiant officer could have checked other sources to determine the validity of his probable cause didn’t mean that the information in hand was false. Davis v. City of Andrews, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 17845 (5th Cir. June 15, 2021).
There was no probable cause nor good faith exception for the 2016 search warrant for defendant. There was, however, for a 2018 warrant. United States v. Abouammo, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112022 (N.D. Cal. June 15, 2021).*
One officer’s search of defendant’s car to recover a gun was covered by inevitable discovery because the search would have occurred anyway. United States v. Turner, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112186 (M.D. N.C. June 15, 2021).*
Even crediting defendant’s version of events, the exclusionary rule would not be applied to the video of defendant’s violent resistance during his arrest. United States v. Hill, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111803 (S.D. Ind. June 14, 2021).
Defendant’s new crime during his arrest obviates an exclusionary rule inquiry. United States v. Patton, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111651 (E.D. La. June 15, 2021).
First time CI’s information that started with a buy off defendant a month earlier, helped support a 30 day ping warrant on defendant’s phone. United States v. Lockett, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111939 (M.D. La. June 14, 2021).
The officer’s unreasonable mistake of fact of the need for a motorist to pull over for a stopped emergency vehicle on a two lane road led to granting the motion to suppress the stop. United States v. Vongphachanh, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111814 (N.D. Ind. June 15, 2021).*
"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.
