The exclusionary rule does not apply to child abuse allegations in administrative proceedings. The court declines the request to apply it despite the rule that it doesn’t apply in civil cases generally because of harm to the children. In re K.L., 2021 W. Va. LEXIS 300 (June 3, 2021).
A pill bottle attributed to defendant was seized by police from behind the counter of the deli where he worked. He fails to show a reasonable expectation of privacy there. United States v. Alawi, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104793 (W.D. N.Y. June 2, 2021).*
The officer had reasonable suspicion to ask for DLs of the occupant of a car that slid off a snowy highway because there was enough indication going on that something else happened. United States v. Chang, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 16734 (7th Cir. June 4, 2021).*
Posted inExclusionary rule, Reasonable suspicion, Standing|Comments Off on WV: Exclusionary rule would not be applied in administrative child abuse proceeding for protection of children
“[W]e agree with the district court that the ‘omission of information about the sources’ backgrounds, criminal histories, or motives does not change the probable cause determination.’ See also United States v. Sims, 551 F.3d 640, 645 (7th Cir. 2008) (omission of confidential source’s arrest record was not material to the probable cause determination). While ‘we think the[] omissions’ of information about the sources’ credibility are ‘unfortunate,’ those omissions ‘do not negate probable cause; on these facts. See Glenn, 966 F.3d at 661.” Defendant also doesn’t show that it was more than just negligence. United States v. Woodfork, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 16735 (7th Cir. June 3, 2021).
Police received a noise complaint from an apartment complex where a person in defendant’s apartment was throwing things and threatening to hurt other occupants. Police came to his door and he told them to “F— off” and leave. they were able to persuade him to let them in, and apparent child pornography was visible on his computer screen. The first entry was valid based on exigency, and that led to a search warrant. State v. Black, 2021 ND 103, 2021 N.D. LEXIS 97 (June 3, 2021).*
Posted inEmergency / exigency, Franks doctrine|Comments Off on CA7: Omission of CI’s criminal history was “unfortunate” but not material for Franks
Plain view justified the seizure of defendant’s van in his driveway, even assuming it was on the curtilage. It was immediately apparent to the officers it was criminal evidence. Combs v. State, 2021 Ind. LEXIS 358 (June 3. 2021). n.5:
Defendant’s cross-examination about others not ultimately charged after the search opened the door to his suppressed statement. “First, defendant elicited that although the police arrested him and the other two persons who were in his apartment at the time a search warrant was executed, the arrests of the other two were voided. The court providently exercised its discretion in finding that this testimony opened the door to defendant’s suppressed statement to the police in the apartment as to the location of the two illegal weapons he was charged with possessing …” People v. Gumbs, 2021 NY Slip Op 03532, 2021 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3627 (1st Dept. June 3, 2021)
Defendant’s claim the omitted information was material is nearly summarily affirmed. It wasn’t. United States v. Jones, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 16561 (5th Cir. June 3, 2021).*
Neighbor’s 911 call about an apparent altercation in plaintiff’s house justified police entry on exigency. Cost v. Borough of Dickson City, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 16570 (3d Cir. June 3, 2021).*
A police officer’s admission at trial that the affidavit for search warrant was ghostwritten for him didn’t show a Franks violation because there clearly was probable cause. United States v. Ware, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 16568 (3d Cir. June 3, 2021).
“The affidavit provided abundant probable cause concerning Lozano’s drug trafficking activities. There was physical evidence, including three kilograms of methamphetamine, text messages on Guerra and Duarte’s phones, and the photo of Lozano on Duarte’s phone, as well as the incriminating statements by the co-defendants. Given the sources and volume of evidence, no reasonable agent would have believed the affidavit was so lacking in probable cause that the magistrate judge was deficient in signing it. The Leon good faith exception applies.” United States v. Lozano, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103900 (W.D. La. May 12, 2021).*
Defendant’s Kansas traffic stop was attenuated from what the officers otherwise knew about him. “In the case sub judice, law enforcement officers learned that appellant possessed 40,000 grams of marijuana in his residence independent of the Kansas trooper’s observations that occurred one week before Detective Purdin’s encounter with appellant.” There was probable cause. State v. Lask, 2021-Ohio-1888, 2021 Ohio App. LEXIS 1830 (4th Dist. May 26, 2021).*
DMV’s computer mistake defendant’s DL was suspended doesn’t invoke the exclusionary rule under Evans. United States v. Salazar, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103027 (N.D. Ohio June 2, 2021).
Defendant’s “regenerating” activity in selling heroin made the warrant application not stale. State v. Dillard, 2021-NCCOA-254, 2021 N.C. App. LEXIS 250 (June 1, 2021).
Defendant wasn’t in custody for Miranda purposes during a traffic stop even though the officer knew he’d arrest him. Officer “Hatfield did not tell the Defendant that he had already determined that the Defendant would definitely be arrested as a result of the traffic stop, and he did not raise the specter of arrest as a tool to coerce the Defendant into making a statement. Instead, he was responding to the Defendant’s hypothetical question regarding what action he would take if the Defendant did not cooperate with further investigation.” State v. Manzenberger, 2021 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 250 (June 3, 2021).
Plaintiff failed to address defendant’s standing in defense to this § 1983, and that’s a concession. Apt. Ass’n of Greater L.A. v. City of L.A., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103864 (C.D. Cal. June 1, 2021).*
Posted inCustody, Exclusionary rule, Staleness, Standing|Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: DMV’s computer mistake def’s DL was suspended doesn’t invoke the exclusionary rule under Evans
Trash out for collection at the curb is not on the curtilage. United States v. Holmes, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 16418 (4th Cir. June 2, 2021).
The affidavit for a tracking warrant was misleading in one respect, but it wasn’t material to the overall probable cause finding. United States v. Dow, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102546 (N.D. Cal. June 1, 2021).*
Plaintiff fails to show anything to support his claim that a prison body cavity search was unreasonable or retaliatory or to harass. Hendrix v. United States, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102695 (D. Nev. May 26, 2021).*
The evidence supports the district court’s conclusion the inventory was a true inventory and not investigatory on plain error review. United States v. Williamson, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 16385 (8th Cir. June 2, 2021).*
WaPo: If facial recognition is not regulated now, it will never be used responsibly (“Facial recognition software is full of peril, but it’s also full of potential. with the powerful technology still in its infancy and regulation next to nonexistent, now is the time to write rules that would nudge its development in a useful rather than a dystopian direction.”)
Posted inSurveillance technology|Comments Off on WaPo: If facial recognition is not regulated now, it will never be used responsibly
Tribal police have the inherent authority to stop and search non-Indians on tribal lands for potential violations of tribal, state, or federal law. United States v. Cooley, 2021 U.S. LEXIS 2816 (June 1, 2021). The syllabus:
Allegation of a sexual assault by a school official states a Fourth Amendment claim. Hermann v. Kirkwood R-7 Sch. Dist., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102574 (E.D. Mo. June 1, 2021).
Officers with a search warrant for electronic devices could look in a plastic store sack because it could contain what they were searching for. State v. Canter, 2021 Wash. App. LEXIS 1330 (June 1, 2021).
“Adside cannot state a plausible constitutional claim against Lieutenant Stokes for depriving him of his personal property for 72 hours” in jail. Adside v. Stokes, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102657 (N.D. Fla. Apr. 27, 2021).*
A citizen’s retrieving a drink cup from a street trash container was a private search, aside from whether there was no reasonable expectation of privacy in discarded trash. State v. Bass, 2021 Wash. App. LEXIS 1332 (June 1, 2021).*
An agency investigative subpoena duces tecum is akin to a grand jury’s, following Morton Salt and Powell. State Dept. of Finance v. AT&T Inc., 2021 Del. LEXIS 178 (June 1, 2021):
“Thus, under binding precedent from this court and the Supreme Court, any reasonable officer would have known that Defendants’ suspicionless and warrantless search of Katzenjammer’s body, while she lay unconscious in a hospital bed, violated the Fourth Amendment.” Young v. Hauri, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 16270 (9th Cir. June 1, 2021).
“There are lots of laws regulating automobile traffic. Some of them are underenforced, and many drivers commit infractions without getting caught or cited by the police. Add to that the rule that an officer’s ulterior motives do not make an objectively lawful traffic stop unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment, and you get a recipe for uneven law enforcement and the seeds of community distrust. See Sarah A. Seo, Policing the Open Road: How Cars Transformed American Freedom (2019); Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 813 (1996). But while these concerns hover in the background, the question presented in this case is straightforward: did Chicago police officers observe a traffic violation before they pulled over defendant Marshall Payne?” “ In light of my findings, there was no Fourth Amendment violation. The officers observed two traffic violations, and that justified Payne’s detention. Rosa properly seized the gun during the stop. The motion to suppress evidence is denied.” United States v. Payne, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102576 (N.D. Ill. June 1, 2021).*
Posted inPretext, Qualified immunity, Stop and frisk|Comments Off on CA9: Suspicionless search of unconscious person in hospital bed violated clearly established law
Defendant was a visitor at a friend’s house when the house was searched under a warrant for drugs. She was on the couch with a meth pipe next to her, so it was reasonable to search her lockbox under the warrant for the host’s premises. “This was enough to give officers “particularized suspicion” that Simmermaker was connected to the illicit activity that provided the basis for the warrant.” United States v. Simmermaker, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 16238 (8th Cir. June 1, 2021).
The inventory policy here was specific and articulated in the proof, and there was no indication the inventory was a pretext for criminal investigation. United States v. Thibeault, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 16258 (10th Cir. June 1, 2021).*
In an illegal entry case, identity evidence is generally not suppressible. United States v. Hernandez-Pacheco, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 16304 (11th Cir. June 1, 2021).*
There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a text message sent to another cell phone. Commonwealth v. Delgado-Rivera, 2021 Mass. LEXIS 341 (June 1, 2021):
The State of Maryland’s Department of Information Technology owns and controls the computers on its network and has the authority to enter offices to enter computers. Here, child pornography was found. Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the computer as shown in the user manual and the on-screen banner. Moreover, the chief of IT had the power to consent. United States v. Cormack, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101623 (D. Md. May 28, 2021).
“We have reviewed the video and, like the trial court, find such does not demonstrate any traffic violation.” The trial court’s findings suppressing the stop are thus supported by the record. State v. Gordon, 2021-Ohio-1803, 2021 Ohio App. LEXIS 1803 (5th Dist. May 27, 2021).*
Plaintiff’s claim that his stop was based on a lie in his police report sufficiently invoked Heck to be barred. Payne v. Sawyer, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 16218 (6th Cir. May 28, 2021).
Police officers on foot blocking defendant’s car made his stop no longer consensual. No one would feel free to leave. The facts and totality of the circumstances showed the officers had reasonable suspicion for the stop, including defendant’s demeanor. United States v. Gray, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102067 (D.D.C. May 31, 2021).
There was reasonable suspicion for defendant’s detention, including putting him in a police car while they sorted it out. That was not yet an arrest. United States v. Rogers, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 16160 (6th Cir. May 27, 2021).
The affidavit for the search warrant here was unsealed as to defendant but the court declines yet to unseal it to the general public because the government represents the investigation is still ongoing. In re Residence at 21012 Peckham Rd., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101895 (D. Idaho May 18, 2021).
Plaintiff’s claim that there was a criminal investigation for sexual abuse of a minor that was found unsubstantiated does not state a claim under the Fourth Amendment. Williams v. Fresno Cty. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101805 (E.D. Cal. May 27, 2021).
An officer’s internet search provided a substantial basis for finding probable cause to search defendant’s house for evidence of misrepresenting military service. Citations to the places where the information was be found elevated this above a mere anonymous tip. United States v. Tang, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101743 (E.D. Cal. May 27, 2021):
Defendant wasn’t seized just by the officer pointing a gun at him; it was when he raised his hands and submitted. “Here, because the officers were responding to a call about an individual with a firearm and Officer Davis reasonably thought that Morgan had reached toward his waistband, the Court finds that the officers’ use of their firearms and handcuffs to effectuate Morgan’s seizure did not convert the Terry stop into a full-fledged arrest. Thus, the officers need only have had reasonable suspicion—i.e., ‘a particularized and objective basis for suspecting’—that Morgan was engaging in criminal activity for the stop to be valid. See Cortez, 449 U.S. at 417-18.” Officers didn’t have reasonable suspicion until defendant reached for his waistband. United States v. Morgan, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101549 (N.D. Ill. May 28, 2021).
The target of a search (here Rudy Giuliani) doesn’t have a precharge right of access to the materials where the investigation is ongoing. In re Search Warrants Executed on April 28, 2021, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101348 (S.D. N.Y. May 28, 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.
