There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in the inside of a car in a hotel parking lot that could be seen by an officer with a flashlight. State v. Bean, 2020 Iowa App. LEXIS 825 (Aug. 19, 2020).
The totality of information from trash pulls showed probable cause for a search warrant for the house. State v. Kuuttila, 2020 Iowa App. LEXIS 802 (Aug. 19, 2020).*
Defendant’s effort to supplement the record for his appeal with additional information about CSLI and Carpenter that came down while the appeal was pending is denied. This is to create a new record, not supplement an existing one, and the information was previously available [just not appreciated]. State v. Tyus, 2020 Conn. Super. LEXIS 868 (New London July 20, 2020).*
“A decision of whether or not to file a motion to suppress is a strategic choice of counsel.” Here, there was no factual basis to file a motion to suppress. Waters v. United States, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147764 (W.D. Tex. Aug. 17, 2020).
The affidavit for search warrant showed plenty of probable cause. The affidavit also justified a no-knock provision because it established reasonable grounds to think that the defendant might be armed and involved in drug trafficking. United States v. Adams, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 26157 (1st Cir. Aug. 18, 2020).
A Mississippi traffic safety checkpoint was reasonable on the totality because every car was stopped, even though the programmatic purpose of the checkpoint was scant. Reasonable suspicion developed that the occupants of the vehicle were being trafficked. United States v. Burgos-Coronado, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 26266 (5th Cir. Aug. 18, 2020).
Even if defense counsel didn’t object to alleged consent, the search was valid by inevitable discovery. Thompson v. United States, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 26265 (11th Cir. Aug. 19, 2020).*
The consensus of several other circuits is that seizing property under a search warrant is not subject to the Fifth Amendment’s takings clause. See, e.g., Lech v. Jackson, 791 Fed. Appx. 711, 717 (10th Cir. 2019), cert. denied, No. 19-1123, 2020 U.S. LEXIS 3417 (June 29, 2020); Zitter v. Petruccelli, 744 Fed. Appx. 90, 96 (3d Cir. 2018); Johnson v. Manitowoc County, 635 F.3d 331, 333-34, 336 (7th Cir. 2011); Acadia Tech., Inc. v. United States, 458 F.3d 1327, 1331-32 (Fed. Cir. 2006). This court agrees. Ostipow v. Federspiel, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 26242 (6th Cir. Aug. 18, 2020).
Where the jury found one officer used excessive force at book-in at the jail, proof that others joined in a conspiracy to fabricate a story was sufficient to hold them liable, too. Sánchez v. Foley, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 26154 (1st Cir. Aug. 18, 2020).*
Possession of a legal amount of recreational marijuana isn’t probable cause for search without more. “Therefore, pursuant to Lee, there must be additional evidence, beyond mere possession of a legal amount of marijuana, to support a reasonable belief the defendant has an illegal amount or is violating some other statutory provision.” People v. McGee, 2020 Cal. App. LEXIS 779 (3d Dist. July 28, 2020) (published Aug. 18, 2020).
The 2016 tracking order application was detailed and showed probable cause. The search of defendant’s car was justified by the automobile exception. United States v. Fisher, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147841 (D. Minn. July 7, 2020), adopted, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146897 (D. Minn. Aug. 14, 2020).*
Posted inProbable cause|Comments Off on Cal.3: In a recreational MJ state, more is required for a car search than just possession of some marijuana
There is no distinction between civil and criminal traffic infractions under the Fourth Amendment under Whren and Arizona v. Johnson. Even a patdown can occur in a civil infraction stop. United States v. Meadows, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 26120 (10th Cir. Aug. 18, 2020):
The warranted video surveillance of the spa in the Kraft case was unreasonable for lack of minimization to protect privacy. The law on surreptitious surveillance and minimization is well settled. “The type of law enforcement surveillance utilized in these cases is extreme. While there will be situations which may warrant the use of the techniques at issue, the strict Fourth Amendment safeguards developed over the past few decades must be observed.” The videos were suppressed. State v. Kraft, 2020 Fla. App. LEXIS 11788 (Fla. 4th DCA Aug. 19, 2020):
Posted inReasonableness, Surveillance technology|Comments Off on FL4: Surreptitious video surveillance in Kraft spa case was unreasonable for lack of minimization
Police came to defendant’s house for a community caretaking call, and they heard a person inside calling for help. They knew defendant was on probation for firearms, that he had a history of drug use, and that he had surveillance cameras. They entered and saw a woman on the floor at the bottom of the stairs. A brief protective sweep of the premises was reasonable. United States v. Hanuman, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 26116 (8th Cir. Aug. 18, 2020).
The officers entered plaintiff’s home on a mental health emergency, and the entry and their subsequent actions didn’t exceed the scope of the justification for the entry. They acted reasonably. Graham v. Barnette, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 25969 (8th Cir. Aug. 17, 2020).
Defendant’s broad consent permitted a full search of his cell phone. The consent logically permitted the police to review the evidence afterward, too. United States v. Gallegos-Espinal, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 26108 (5th Cir. Aug. 17, 2020).*
CNET: License plate tracking for police set to go nationwide by Alfred Ng (“A company that makes a license plate reader announces a national network for law enforcement to follow car movements. It’s already in more than 700 cities.”)
Posted inSurveillance technology|Comments Off on CNET: License plate tracking for police set to go nationwide
Defendant had standing to challenge the stop and search of a car he’d borrowed with permission of the owner despite the lack of a driver’s license, but he loses on the merits. United States v. Zimmerman, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148101 (E.D. N.Y. Aug. 14, 2020).
Defendant moved out of his ex-girlfriend’s house and left behind a thumb drive. She found files that made her suspicious, and she got a friend to recover deleted files. This was a private search, aside from the abandonment. State v. Ross, 2020-Ohio-4109, 2020 Ohio App. LEXIS 3003 (11th Dist. Aug. 17, 2020).*
Just assuming that there were false statements in the affidavit for the search warrant for defendant’s BAC and striking it, the remainder shows probable cause, so there was no error in not suppressing. Washington v. State, 2020 Tex. App. LEXIS 6581 (Tex. App. – Houston (14th Dist.) Aug. 18, 2020).*
The search of text messages on a state administrative enforcement officer’s state issued cell phone was reasonable under City of Ontario v. Quon. Tingle v. Hebert, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 26057 (5th Cir. Aug. 17, 2020).
Defendant’s renting a car for $630 to drive overnight from Orlando to rural North Carolina and back in one day along with nervousness was enough for reasonable suspicion. United States v. Villavicencio, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 26033 (4th Cir. Aug. 17, 2020).*
Whether by probable cause and the automobile exception or inventory, the search of defendant’s car was reasonable and valid. United States v. Russell, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147647 (M.D. Ala. July 10, 2020).*
Posted inSurveillance technology|Comments Off on Gothamist: NYPD Used Facial Recognition Technology In Siege Of Black Lives Matter Activist’s Apartment
The officer’s conclusion that the car associated with defendant had fled from him two days earlier had support in the record, and there was reasonable suspicion for the stop. State v. Stanton, 2020-Ohio-4087, 2020 Ohio App. LEXIS 2978 (2d Dist. Aug. 14, 2020).*
“Here, Hall was seen coming and going from the property within 48 hours of the warrant application. Information from the CI placed Hall at the apartment, and the pictures and videos posted on Hall’s Facebook page and the pictures for that apartment on the Airbnb website further establish a connection between Hall and Apt. No. 110. Hall’s connection with the residence, together with the information from the CI that Hall was dealing drugs from that location and the information from the anonymous tipster that someone was dealing drugs from Apt. No. 110, supports a finding that there is ‘a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place.’ Gates, 462 U.S. at 218.” There was also good faith. United States v. Abari, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146273 (D. Minn. Aug. 14, 2020).*
Posted inNexus, Stop and frisk|Comments Off on OH2: Conduct two days before seeing defendant on street justified stop
Defendant’s furtive activity before the stop observed on a parking lot and during the stop was reasonable suspicion. United States v. Pierre, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147127 (W.D. La. July 17, 2020).*
Defendant admitted to there being drugs in the vehicle, so there was probable cause for the search. United States v. Drake, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146490 (D. Neb. Aug. 14, 2020).*
Decedent was shot by an officer as he was fleeing and crashing into things. The officer ended up inside the car trying to assist another officer trying to pull decedent out by pushing him out. No case is close to this on the use of deadly force, and the officer gets qualified immunity. Stewart v. City of Euclid, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 25888 (6th Cir. Aug. 14, 2020).*
Defendant’s neighbor could see him from his house masturbating to child pornography. He called the police and the police corroborated it but walked on the curtilage, too. The neighbor was shown as a confidential informant but was really a citizen informant. There was probable cause shown in the affidavit for the warrant, and the good faith exception applied as well. State v. Long, 2020-Ohio-4090 (6th Dist. Aug. 14, 2020).*
The government corroborated what it could of their first time informant, and this provided probable cause for the search warrant. The affidavit also showed sufficient nexus to two premises associated with defendant. United States v. Miles, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146653 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 14, 2020).*
The government showed probable cause for issuance of a tracking warrant on defendant’s cell phone (pre-Carpenter). United States v. Fisher, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146897 (D. Minn. Aug. 14, 2020).*
Defense counsel had a conflict of interest where he represented both a drug case client and the police officer who arrested and searched him and his cell phone. Defendant made a sufficient showing of actual prejudice to warrant a new trial where defense counsel didn’t contest the search. Podieh v. State, 2020 Md. LEXIS 363 (Aug. 14. 2020) (the police officer was a divorce client, and the lawyer was handling both sides of the divorce; in that case, the wife actually sued the lawyer for negligence in favoring the husband police officer):
Posted inIneffective assistance|Comments Off on MD: Defense counsel in drug case had conflict of interest in representing police officer in a divorce case who arrested and searched client and the search wasn’t contested
The state judge who issued the search warrant was a neutral and detached magistrate under the Fourth Amendment. Whether the magistrate had state law jurisdiction is a kind of circular argument under state law, but the Fourth Amendment only requires “neutral and detached.” “The magistrate in this case thus may well have lacked authority to issue the warrant. But we need not resolve this point because [this] error was [not] ‘obvious’” for plain error review. The magistrate recognized the affidavit was deficient and took testimony to supplement it. [That’s what the magistrate is supposed to do.] There was probable cause on the totality. There is no Fourth Amendment right to recording of testimony in support of a search warrant, but there is a limited remand to make a record on what it was. United States v. Davis, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 25889 (6th Cir. Aug. 14, 2020):
The officer’s questions here about what was in the car were unnecessary and unreasonably added 25 seconds to the stop. They were, however, before Rodriguez was decided [but what about Caballes?] and complied with the law in effect at the time. Therefore, the good faith exception applies. United States v. Campbell, 912 F.3d 1340 (11th Cir. 2019), cert. den. 140 S. Ct. 196, 205 L. Ed. 2d 100 (2019), is vacated and this substituted opinion is filed: United States v. Campbell, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 25844 (11th Cir. Aug. 14, 2020):
Posted inGood faith exception, Reasonable suspicion|Comments Off on CA11: Questions unrelated to the stop unreasonably extended it, but it complied with law at time, so GFE applies
An Ebola quarantine order is entitled to qualified immunity under the Fourth Amendment essentially for lack of a case on point that it could be unreasonable. Liberian Cmty. Ass’n of Conn. v. Lamont, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 25804 (2d Cir. Aug. 14, 2020) (submitted Feb. 8, 2018, 30 months ago):
"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.
