The officer affiant adequately corroborated the CI to show probable cause. Defendant’s argument that the search of his house under the warrant couldn’t include the back yard was not preserved below [but it usually would be valid anyway]. State v. Richardson, 2019 La. App. LEXIS 1514 (La. App. 5 Cir. Sept. 4, 2019).
Officer kicked at plaintiff while plaintiff was flailing around unrestrained, and it was caught on a bystander’s cell phone video. The officer gets qualified immunity for that attempt at controlling the situation. Marantes v. Miami-Dade County, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26763 (11th Cir. Sept. 5, 2019).*
“The officer arrested Romero for obstruction because he failed to immediately comply with the officer’s request that he submit to a pat-down search. Romero argued in his motion that the firearm must be suppressed because the officer had neither (1) reasonable suspicion to conduct the pat-down search nor (2) probable cause to arrest Romero for obstruction. The district court denied Romero’s motion. We reverse, because we agree with Romero’s latter argument that there was insufficient probable cause to support an arrest under [N.M.’s] section 30-22-1(D). Thus, the search of the backpack cannot be supported as a search incident to arrest. Because of this ruling, we do not address Romero’s first argument that there was no reasonable suspicion to support the initial pat-down search. We remand this case to the district court for further proceedings.” United States v. Romero, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26779 (10th Cir. Sept. 5, 2019).
Posted inReasonable suspicion|Comments Off on CA10: Def could not be charged with obstruction for refusing patdown that lacked RS
Plaintiff produced enough evidence to show defendant officer falsified the case against him and overcame qualified immunity. The prosecutor dropped the criminal case when it was apparent it was bogus, and then plaintiff sued. Parnell v. City of Detroit, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26797 (6th Cir. Sept. 5, 2019).
Actual probable cause doesn’t matter here. “Because a reasonable law enforcement officer acting in good faith could conclude there was probable cause to search Cathcart’s devices, we reverse the district court’s order granting Cathcart’s motion to suppress.” United States v. Cathcart, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26852 (9th Cir. Sept. 5, 2019).*
Posted inGood faith exception, Police misconduct|Comments Off on CA6: Ptf stated a 4A claim and overcame QI for the officer’s allegedly manufacturing case against him
Nearly public strip search of female detainee on an open parking lot by a female officer also berating her with a male officer nearby stated a claim and overcame qualified immunity. Robinson v. Hawkins, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26772 (8th Cir. Sept. 5, 2019): Continue reading →
Officers on patrol heard gunshots and arrived within 35 seconds and saw a group of men dispersing. The directed then to stop while shining flashlights on them, and the directed the men to pull up their shirts. Only defendant didn’t, and he was patted down finding a gun. The stop was reasonable under the circumstances, and the intrusion was minimal considering gunshot were fired seconds before. The district court’s suppression order is reversed. United States v. Curry, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26800 (4th Cir. Sept. 5, 2019): Continue reading →
Posted inEmergency / exigency, Stop and frisk|Comments Off on CA4: Stopping men right after shots were fired to look for guns was reasonable
“As the State admits, using a biohazard container as a workstation for a blood draw is not ideal. However, even viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court’s ruling, we conclude that Fikes failed to meet his burden of showing that Morton’s actions were so egregious that they created an ‘unjustified element of personal risk of infection and pain’ that rose to the level of violating the Fourth Amendment.” State v. Fikes, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 8157 (Tex. App. – Austin Sept. 6, 2019).
The government assertion that the community caretaking function applied is rejected because the officer checking on a limping man wouldn’t immediately handcuff him if just checking on him. Defendant was arrested with probable cause. United States v. Perine, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151305 (D.N.M. Sept. 5, 2019).
Posted inCommunity caretaking function, Drug or alcohol testing|Comments Off on TX3: Phlebotomist’s careless handling of blood draw that didn’t compromise test wasn’t enough to suppress just from alleged risk of infection that didn’t happen
Plaintiff was arrested for ignoring knocks to the door from officers with a writ of possession. They didn’t even ring the doorbell. Officers entered through the garage area and pulled a gun on plaintiff. There was no justification asserted for the entry or the drawing of the weapon. No qualified immunity for arrest for obstruction. On the excessive force claim, officers get qualified immunity. Derowitsch v. Granger, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26888 (11th Cir. Sept. 6, 2019): Continue reading →
Posted inArrest or entry on arrest, Qualified immunity|Comments Off on CA11: Arrest for not answering knocks to door by officers with a writ of possession unreasonable and no QI
Phone calls in juvenile detention were properly recorded. Defendant was on notice of recording. Commonwealth v. Odgren, 483 Mass. 41 (Sept. 4, 2019).
In an immigration case where the petitioner bears the burden of showing an egregious violation of the Fourth Amendment to suppress, he must file an affidavit in support of his prima facie case. Ramirez-Aguilar v. Barr, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26889 (2d Cir. Sept. 6, 2019).
“A group of masked City of Detroit police officers broke down plaintiff Katrina McGrew’s door, threw her to the ground, and handcuffed her so tightly it left bruises. When she complained about how constricting the handcuffs were, the officers threatened her life. She sued the officers pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Michigan law. They now appeal the district court’s denial of their motions for summary judgment based upon qualified immunity and governmental immunity. We affirm, dismiss the appeal in part for lack of jurisdiction, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.” The allegations of the complaint survive qualified immunity. McGrew v. Duncan, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26644 (6th Cir. Sept. 4, 2019).*
The officer’s stop was valid and based on information from DEA that the vehicle being watched in an anticipated drug deal might lack a front license plate. The DEA wanted the vehicle stopped. There was no evidence the officer was acting in bad faith in making the stop. United States v. Cortinas, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151154 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 5, 2019).*
“The less-than-three-minute immigration stop was sufficiently brief under the Fourth Amendment …, and Escobar’s nervous and evasive behavior, unusual responses to lawful questions, and provision of a suspicious bill of lading gave agents sufficient reasonable suspicion to extend the stop. … Rodriguez v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 1609 (2015), does not alter this calculus. …” United States v. Escobar, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26941 (5th Cir. Sept. 5, 2019).*
The dash cam video supports the officer’s testimony defendants were following too close in their rental car. Whether the stop was pretextual doesn’t matter because there is a factual and legal basis for it. The basic part of the stop lasted only seven minutes, and the court finds reasonable suspicion developed during that time. Consent was given allegedly by one without authority, but the trooper told the other who didn’t object. United States v. Cox, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149972 (W.D. Ark. Sept. 4, 2019).*
The court holds that defendant’s status as a parolee literally gave him no reasonable expectation of privacy in his own trailer from a parole search. He seeks narrowing the search under Griffin to avoid Samson and Knights. The court rejects that. United States v. Lynn, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150265 (E.D. Mich. Sept. 4, 2019).
“In a classic case of finding oneself in the wrong place at the wrong time, Dale K. Phillips stopped his truck late at night outside a building that police believed three suspects were in the process of burglarizing. After officers responding to the burglary detained Phillips, they forcefully removed him from his vehicle and eventually arrested him for obstructing their investigation.” He was acquitted at trial, and sued the officers. They get qualified immunity for the stop, arrest, and taking him down. Phillips v. Blair, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26553 (6th Cir. Sept. 3, 2019).*
Suffolk County contracted with a private non-profit to verify registered sex offenders’ addresses, and that required home visits. Plaintiff sued for violation of the Fourth Amendment. The court holds that their actions were permitted under the “special needs” exception because it insures the accuracy of the registry. Jones v. County of Suffolk, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26649 (2d Cir. Sept. 4, 2019).
The court has already held in this case that cell phone pings by order based on exigency were valid. Therefore, they could be included in a later CSLI request. United States v. Andrews, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150579 (D. Minn. Aug. 9, 2019).*
Posted inCell site location information, Special needs|Comments Off on CA2: More regular home visits of sex offenders to verify information reasonable under “special needs”
Officers get qualified immunity for alleged theft of $300,000 in cash and property from plaintiffs because it wasn’t clearly established that theft from a search is unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Jessop v. City of Fresno, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26674 (9th Cir. Sept. 4, 2019), replacing Jessop v. City of Fresno, 918 F.3d 1031 (9th Cir. Mar. 20 2019). Summary by the Court: Continue reading →
Posted inQualified immunity, Warrant execution|Comments Off on CA9: The extreme of QI: officers alleged to have committed theft during execution of a SW get QI because no case says it’s a 4A violation
Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not moving to suppress the search of a cigarette pack removed from defendant’s person at the time of his arrest but searched 30 minutes later. It was still subject to the search incident doctrine. Greene v. State, 2019 Mo. LEXIS 316 (Sept. 3, 2019).
There was probable cause to arrest defendant as he attempted to enter the crime scene of a murder after he was identified by witnesses as the shooter. State v. Watison, 2019 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 552 (Aug. 30, 2019).*
There was probable cause for issuance of the arrest and search warrant. There was no Franks violation. The witnesses at first didn’t fully corroborate their final statement but they finally said it was because they were scared. Thus, it wasn’t material or would change the outcome to have included that. Jackson v. State, 2019 Ga. LEXIS 599 (Sept. 3, 2019).
Defendant was allowed to talk to relatives in an interrogation room, and their conversation was recorded. “Accordingly, we conclude that Easterling’s Fourth Amendment rights were not violated when his conversation with family members in the interrogation room was videotaped and a portion of that tape was later introduced at trial. The trial court did not err by denying Easterling’s motion to suppress.” Easterling v. Commonwealth, 2019 Ky. LEXIS 347 (Aug. 29, 2019).
Defendant’s stop for driving abnormally slow was reasonable under the community caretaking function, despite the officer’s initial hesitation in making the stop. State v. Moiduddin, 2019-Ohio-3544, 2019 Ohio App. LEXIS 3625 (3d Dist. Sept. 3, 2019).*
WaPo: Sen. Markey seeks answers from Ring on doorbell-camera police network
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/09/05/sen-markey-seeks-answers-ring-doorbell-camera-police-network/
Sen. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) is seeking answers from the doorbell-camera firm Ring about its hundreds of video-sharing partnerships with U.S. police agencies, citing ‘serious privacy and civil liberties concerns’ that he said could put people at risk.
Officers had unusual facts during their stop of defendant that supported reasonable suspicion the vehicle might be stolen. Even a computer check didn’t completely dispel reasonable suspicion, so brief continuation of the stop was proper. United States v. Wallace, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26544 (2d Cir. Sept. 3, 2019).*
Defense counsel was not ineffective for “incompetently” arguing petitioner’s Fourth Amendment claim. The issues were raised and decided. United States v. Grier, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149235 (D. Md. Sept. 3, 2019).*
Collective knowledge of the police was shown for probable cause. United States v. Khan, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26545 (7th Cir. Sept. 3, 2019).*
“Even assuming here that the single question, whether there is anything illegal in the car, was not related to the mission of the traffic stop, the question did not violate the Fourth Amendment because it did not lengthen the traffic stop.” United States v. Buzzard, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149242 (S.D. W.Va. Sept. 3, 2019): Continue reading →
Posted inReasonable suspicion|Comments Off on S.D.W.Va.: The single question “Is there anything illegal in the car” doesn’t unlawfully extend the stop
"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.
