Defendant’s stop was objectively reasonable, even though the officer cited the wrong statute. People v. Ambrose, 2020 COA 112, 2020 Colo. App. LEXIS 1384 (July 23, 2020).
“[W]e need not address Salas’s argument that a slight delay to conduct a dog sniff during a routine traffic stop is unconstitutional, because the district court correctly determined that Duane had reasonable suspicion that Mejia and Salas were transporting illegal drugs and that the dog sniff was constitutional on that basis. Contrary to Salas’s argument, this was not a simple ‘routine traffic stop,’ Appellant’s Br. at 23, but rather arose out of an extensive investigation into an ongoing drug enterprise. This was the third in a series of large-scale drug transports.” And a CI provided detailed credible information. United States v. Salas, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 23180 (6th Cir. July 21, 2020).*
The Atlantic: Nothing Can Justify the Attack on Portland by Quinta Jurecic & Benjamin Wittes (“The question of whether these arrests are appropriate has a clear answer—at least in a nation that purports to live under the rule of law.”)
There was plenty of probable cause in the 53 page affidavit that recounted all the officers had done and learned in their investigation. “In addition, this Court would again find that the ‘good faith’ exception to the exclusionary rule established by Leon would apply. This was no cowboy operation. The agents in this case were extremely careful in the efforts to obtain evidence and to seek multiple warrants.” United States v. Evans, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130234 (N.D. W.Va. July 23, 2020).
A stop of the car defendant was a passenger in was based on reasonable suspicion one of the occupants was not here legally. Defendant also turned out to be remaining here illegally. She voluntarily consented to a search of her bedroom that turned up false identity documents. United States v. Santiago-Francisco, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 23153 (4th Cir. July 23, 2020).*
Posted inConsent, Good faith exception|Comments Off on N.D.W.Va.: GFE applies: “This was no cowboy operation. The agents in this case were extremely careful in the efforts to obtain evidence and to seek multiple warrants.”
Probable cause in a search warrant affidavit as to one address was not probable cause as to another. Yet, there was, in fact, separate unstated probable cause as to the second address. The officers reasonably relied on the search warrant for the second address so the good faith exception applies to the second address because there was probable cause. United States v. Humphries, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130077 (N.D. Ohio July 23, 2020):
Posted inGood faith exception|Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: SW was defective as to second address for no showing of PC, but there really was PC, so GFE applies
A preliminary determination of probable cause by a justice of the peace that is not appealed is not entitled to preclusive effect under state law. Therefore, plaintiff states a claim for relief for his alleged false arrest despite that. Scafidi v. Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep’t, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 23088 (9th Cir. July 23, 2020).
Defendant passenger was validly arrested with probable cause during a traffic stop, so the search incident of his person was valid. As a passenger, he lacked standing to challenge the search of the car he was in. United States v. Ceballos, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129112 (D. S.D. July 22, 2020).*
Posted in§ 1983 / Bivens, Issue preclusion, Standing|Comments Off on CA9: Nevada JP’s PC determination never finalized has no preclusive effect in § 1983 case
Unreasonable administrative delay in getting people out of jail that are entitled to it violates the Fourth Amendment under Gerstein and County of Riverside. Williams v. Dart, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 23132 (7th Cir. July 23, 2020):
Posted inArrest or entry on arrest, Reasonableness|Comments Off on CA7: Unreasonable administrative delay in releasing pretrial detainees entitled to release violates 4A
The district court concluded defendant had no standing to challenge a tribal police search of the curtilage of his grandmother’s house where he was an overnight guest. Assuming, without deciding, he has standing, there was clear and obvious exigency for at least the second search after police followed a blood trail plus his grandmother’s consent. United States v. Ish, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 23119 (9th Cir. July 23, 2020).
The digital search warrant for Facebook records was ostensibly overbroad, but it was the issuing magistrate’s error, not the officer’s. The warrant was executed reasonably, and suppression here would serve no deterrent purpose. United States v. Purcell, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 23061 (2d Cir. July 23, 2020).
Defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim for a search issue has to show that he had standing to even make the Fourth Amendment challenge, which he doesn’t. It’s an integral part of the merits claim. United States v. Scher, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129126 (D. Haw. July 22, 2020).
There was reasonable suspicion for continuation of the stop. The drug dog was called 14 minutes into the stop and it arrived in 8 minutes, and this was all reasonable. State v. Bell-Brayboy, 2020 La. App. LEXIS 1087 (La. App. 2 Cir. July 22, 2020).*
Defendant’s alleged ongoing drug operation overcame his staleness challenge. There otherwise was probable cause for the warrant. In re Forkner, 2020 Iowa App. LEXIS 729 (July 22, 2020).*
The state conceded that hot pursuit didn’t justify their entry and relied on consent. “Nor could Boley’s act of letting the officers in be construed as consent. When the officer said she would be coming in, Boley responded with a question – ‘Into the garage?’ – which a reasonable person could construe as surprise at the request. … As for her responses of ‘Okay,’ they were nothing more than acquiescence.” Entry suppressed. State v. Boley, 2020 Iowa App. LEXIS 691 (July 22, 2020).
Defendant’s request for an expert in human ability to smell marijuana was for a fishing expedition into whether the officer was credible that he could smell it. Therefore, no error to deny. State v. Leonard, 2020 Iowa App. LEXIS 743 (July 22, 2020).
Slate: Customs and Border Protection Can Track Cars Nationwide Via Commercial Database by Hannah Klein (“It turns out that U.S. Customs and Border Protection could now keep an eye on your car without even getting a warrant. This month, we learned that CBP bought access to a commercial license plate database, meaning the agency can look up the historical location of cars across the U.S., no legal red tape necessary.”)
Posted inGPS / Tracking Data|Comments Off on Slate: Customs and Border Protection Can Track Cars Nationwide Via Commercial Database
Law and Crime: Two DHS Officials Apparently Just Admitted Their Troops Have Been Violating the Constitution by Colin Kalmbacher (“Acting Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Chad Wolf and one of his subordinates appear to have admitted their agents have been making unconstitutional arrests of Black Lives Matter protesters in Portland during a series of public appearances.”)
Posted inArrest or entry on arrest|Comments Off on Law and Crime: Two DHS Officials Apparently Just Admitted Their Troops Have Been Violating the Constitution
Defendant waived his Fourth Amendment claim by not getting a ruling on the issue in the trial court. Spencer v. Commonwealth, 2020 Va. App. LEXIS 206 (July 21, 2020).
Defendant lost his search claim in the district court and on appeal. In his 2255 he claimed defense counsel was ineffective for not calling some witnesses. His claim that they would provide testimony doesn’t have an offer of proof sufficient to rise above mere speculation. CoA denied. Friskey v. United States, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 22751 (6th Cir. July 21, 2020).*
“Addressing plaintiffs’ Fourth Amendment search claims, the panel first held that the expungement relief sought by plaintiffs — the expungement of all records unconstitutionally obtained and maintained — was available under the Constitution to remedy the alleged constitutional violations. Because the government raised no other argument for dismissal of the Fourth Amendment injunctive relief claim, it should not have been dismissed. Second, the panel held that in light of the overlap between plaintiffs’ Bivens claim and the narrow range of the remaining FISA claims against the Agent Defendants that can proceed, it was not clear whether plaintiffs would continue to press this claim. The panel declined to address whether plaintiffs’ Bivens claim remained available after the Supreme Court’s decision in Ziglar v. Abbasi, 137 S. Ct. 1843 (2017), and held that on remand the district court may determine whether a Bivens remedy is appropriate for any Fourth Amendment claim against the FBI Agent Defendants.” Fazaga v. FBI, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 22775 (9th Cir. July 20, 2020).
Posted in§ 1983 / Bivens|Comments Off on CA9: 4A issues in “travel ban” case: expungement of records unconstitutionally obtained is a remedy
Defendant showed no reasonable expectation of privacy in a package addressed to a fake name at his address. United States v. James, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 22766 (6th Cir. July 21, 2020).
Defendant failed to show that the challenged statements were recklessly or intentionally made or that they were material to the finding of probable cause. United States v. Sanders, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128345 (E.D. Ky. July 21, 2020).*
The officers were investigating a controlled buy of drugs involving a vehicle. The search incident doctrine doesn’t apply; the automobile exception does. United States v. Rutherford, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128349 (E.D. Tenn. July 21, 2020).*
Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in images captured by a camera warrantlessly placed in a fake smoke detector on the ceiling of his apartment building hallway right outside his door. United States v. Trice, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 22738 (6th Cir. July 21, 2020):
The affidavit for search warrant here originally used the name “Aaren” but the officer found “Taylor” could be the last name, and the affidavit was changed for that. It turned out that there were two people. The district court properly deleted one paragraph for falsity, and the remainder still left probable cause. Defense counsel was thus not ineffective. O’Neil v. United States, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 22639 (8th Cir. July 20, 2020).
Plaintiff had to plead a lack of probable cause for a false arrest claim. “Properly placing credibility aside, we agree with the district court that Andersen’s evidence did not rebut the presumption that her detention was reasonable.” Andersen v. Glenview, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 22631 (7th Cir. July 21, 2020).*
The state waived its challenge to the defendant’s reliance on the state constitution by failure to litigate it below. Waiver claims have to be applied evenhandedly between the state and defendants. Commonwealth v. Wolfel, 2020 Pa. LEXIS 3797 (July 21, 2020).
The trial court erred first in granting a Franks hearing and then granting relief on it. Illinois recognizes that an informant’s falsity run through an unsuspecting officer can provide for relief. Nevertheless, defendant didn’t show enough to even get a Franks hearing for deliberate or reckless false statement, so the suppression order is reversed. People v. Williams, 2020 IL App (1st) 190418, 2020 Ill. App. LEXIS 483 (July 20, 2020).*
The affidavit for search warrant for text messages on a cell phone showed probable cause and nexus. United States v. Washington, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127612 (D. Ore. July 12, 2020).*
Defendant was arrested in his house on a cold and dreary day. He answered the door in his underwear. Officers were permitted to conduct a protective sweep before getting his clothing for transport because at least one other person expected to be there wasn’t accounted for. Guns were lawfully found under the bed. United States v. Rodriguez, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126980 (W.D. Mo. June 8, 2020)
“Officers Bak and Chawla each had probable cause to search the Chevy since they observed ammunition and a handgun magazine in the backseat, and overheard Richardson state that he is a felon. Those facts, taken together, created a reasonable belief that Richardson was a felon in possession of ammunition and potentially a firearm in violation of law, and that the Chevy contained evidence of that crime (i.e., the ammunition and the magazine). The officers were accordingly permitted to search the Chevy for the weapon associated with the ammunition and magazine, and seize the ammunition and magazine as evidence.” United States v. Richardson, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127364 (C.D. Cal. July 20, 2020).*
"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.
