E.D.Mich.: Affidavit for SW was “bare bones” so no GFE; Brandeis quoted

The affidavit for the search warrant for defendant’s home proved to be “bare bones” and showed no probable cause or nexus to crime whatsoever. Accordingly, the good faith exception doesn’t even apply. The court cites Brandeis’s 1928 Olmstead dissent. United States v. Nabor, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149313 (E.D. Mich. Sept. 3, 2019) [What is more telling is that the good faith exception has caused woefully insufficient affidavits to cause real search warrants to issue. This is a good example.]:
Continue reading →

Posted in Good faith exception, Probable cause | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Affidavit for SW was “bare bones” so no GFE; Brandeis quoted

CA10: No occupant having a DL justified extending the stop

Defendant was a passenger detained with the driver. Nobody had a DL, and that reasonably caused the extension of the stop. His argument reasonable suspicion didn’t extend to him “cannot support Gurule’s theory that he was unlawfully detained as a derivative consequence of the driver’s detention. None of the vehicle’s occupants possessed a valid driver’s license, and the efforts on the part of law enforcement to help locate a licensed driver cannot be characterized as unconstitutionally extending this traffic stop.” United States v. Gurule, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26566 (10th Cir. July 11, 2019).

Defendant lost on standing and the merits of a vehicle search. His motion to reopen the motion to suppress for additional evidence on standing gets him nowhere because he loses on the merits anyway. United States v. Andrews, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149526 (D. Minn. Sept. 3, 2019).*

Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA10: No occupant having a DL justified extending the stop

NYT: Police Use of Facial Recognition Is Accepted by British Court

NYT: Police Use of Facial Recognition Is Accepted by British Court By Adam Satariano: “In a closely watched case, a judge ruled that live facial recognition does not violate privacy rights. There has been little legal precedent about its use.”

Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on NYT: Police Use of Facial Recognition Is Accepted by British Court

NC: Def’s arrest was without PC, but he abandoned his gun

“The trial court erred in denying Defendant’s motion to suppress the firearm based on its reasoning that officers had the probable cause necessary to arrest Defendant for resisting, delaying, or obstructing a public officer. The firearm, however, was not the fruit of an unlawful seizure, as the evidence introduced at trial established that Defendant voluntarily abandoned the firearm before he was seized within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. Therefore, despite the trial court’s error in resolving the motion to suppress, Defendant has failed to show plain error in the admission of the firearm at trial.” State v. Holley, 2019 N.C. App. LEXIS 727 (Sept. 3, 2019).

Defendant’s flight at 100 mph in a 45 zone and driving recklessly was reasonable suspicion. State v. Mahatha, 2019 N.C. App. LEXIS 717 (Sept. 3, 2019).*

Posted in Abandonment, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on NC: Def’s arrest was without PC, but he abandoned his gun

VI: RS exists on smell of marijuana in a car even though locally small amounts of MJ was decriminalized

Despite decriminalization of small amounts of marijuana in VI, reasonable suspicion of possession of a small amount of marijuana is still contraband (an issue already settled here) that can justify a stop. Here, officers were watching a high crime area known for drug transactions and saw defendant with a joint and approached him. People v. Pemberton, 2019 VI SUPER 118 (Aug. 30, 2019).

Tasing a resisting suspect three times did not violate clearly established law, and the officers get qualified immunity. It otherwise appeared reasonable. Handcuffing another behind his back in the midst of this was reasonable, too. Rudley v. Little Rock Police Dep’t, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26567 (8th Cir. Sept. 3, 2019).*

Posted in Excessive force, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on VI: RS exists on smell of marijuana in a car even though locally small amounts of MJ was decriminalized

VA: Def’s ignoring shouts to show his hands and reaching to back seat justified pulling him out of the car and doing a sweep of the car

Defendant ignored 7-10 shouts to keep his hands up and get out of the car, and he reached down into the back seat. Officers opened the door and pulled him. Then he was seized, and it was reasonable to pull him out. Checking under the seat, drugs were found. The protective search under the seat was reasonable. Hill v. Commonwealth, 2019 Va. LEXIS 104 (Aug. 30, 2019).

There was reasonable suspicion for continuing defendant’s stop because he was driving a car with a single key in the ignition, he said he borrowed the car from a friend that he couldn’t name, he had a car with PA plates but he was driving from his home in NY to PA. Commonwealth v. Benitez, 2019 PA Super 268 (Sept. 3, 2019).*

Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on VA: Def’s ignoring shouts to show his hands and reaching to back seat justified pulling him out of the car and doing a sweep of the car

DE: DNA warrant fails because affidavit for it does show how or why it could be found

“As previously noted, this Court must pay great deference to a magistrate’s determination of probable cause and must take a common-sense approach rather than a hyper-technical approach. Nonetheless, given the totality of the circumstances set forth in the Affidavit, including the absence of any indicated relevant training or experience and the failure to describe the likelihood of recovery of DNA from the seized evidence, this Court finds that the Affidavit in question fails to establish a fair probability that Defendant’s DNA can be linked to a crime. Therefore, the warrant for Defendant’s DNA is not supported by probable cause.” State v. Bell, 2019 Del. Super. LEXIS 421 (Aug. 28, 2019).

The delay in the stop to 18 minutes was largely because the passenger didn’t have any identification and it took longer just to get her information verified. Therefore, the extension of the stop was reasonable. United States v. Hamilton, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147915 (S.D. Ind. Aug. 30, 2019).*

Posted in DNA, Nexus, Probable cause, Reasonableness | Comments Off on DE: DNA warrant fails because affidavit for it does show how or why it could be found

CA8: Stop lacked RS, but the finding of a warrant on def was attenuation under Strieff and search incident was valid

Defendant was known to the officer and directed to stay away from a bus shelter. He was found there and the officer accosted him. The district court found reasonable suspicion to support the seizure of a firearm from his person. The Eighth Circuit disagrees but finds attenuation under Strieff: A warrant came up on defendant and then he admitted he was armed. There was no evidence that the officer was known to stop people just to fish for warrants, so there finding of the gun was attenuated. United States v. Lowry, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26455 (8th Cir. Aug. 30, 2019).

Defendant raised a Caballes/Rodriguez issue that the stop was overextended without reasonable suspicion, but the findings of fact are incomplete. The case is remanded for more findings. Warick v. Commonwealth, 2019 Ky. LEXIS 351 (Aug. 29, 2019).*

Posted in Attenuation, Search incident, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on CA8: Stop lacked RS, but the finding of a warrant on def was attenuation under Strieff and search incident was valid

Lexology: Carpenter and Everything After: The Supreme Court Nudges the Fourth Amendment into the Information Age

Lexology: Carpenter and Everything After: The Supreme Court Nudges the Fourth Amendment into the Information Age by Christopher Fonzone, Kate Heinzelman, and Michael R. Roberts

Posted in Cell site location information | Comments Off on Lexology: Carpenter and Everything After: The Supreme Court Nudges the Fourth Amendment into the Information Age

ME: Nexus between cell phone and crime can be inferred from totality of affidavit

Probable cause was shown for nexus between defendant’s cell phone and a multi-person burglary ring. While the affidavit didn’t explicitly state that the conspirators would communicate by cell phone before the burglary, it was a reasonable inference on the totality. Therefore, the trial court erred in suppressing. State v. Warner, 2019 ME 140, 2019 Me. LEXIS 142 (Aug. 29, 2019):
Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Nexus | Comments Off on ME: Nexus between cell phone and crime can be inferred from totality of affidavit

N.D.Cal.: Compelled use of fingerprint to open cell phone not testimonial

The court at first declined to sign a search warrant for a cell phone that compelled use of a fingerprint to unlock it. After further submissions from the USAO and the FPD as invited amicus, the court concludes that a revised warrant would be signed, and the use of the fingerprint would not be testimonial where the information is used for no other purpose. United States v. Sealed Warrant, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147836 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 16, 2019):
Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Privileges, Warrant execution | Comments Off on N.D.Cal.: Compelled use of fingerprint to open cell phone not testimonial

W.D.Pa.: An NCIC check is within the normal mission of a traffic stop

An NCIC check is within the normal mission of a traffic stop. “Next, regardless of the timing of events, ‘most courts confronted with the issue have determined that checking a passenger’s driver’s license in addition to the vehicle driver’s license is not an impermissible extension of a traffic stop.’” United States v. Burrus, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146913 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 29, 2019).

Defendant’s traffic stop resulted in the officer finding her seeming disoriented and the inside of the car smelled of alcohol. She produced the wrong papers to the officer. There was reasonable suspicion for continuing the stop. State v. St. Amand, 2019-Ohio-3524, 2019 Ohio App. LEXIS 3594 (2d Dist. Aug. 30, 2019).*

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: An NCIC check is within the normal mission of a traffic stop

ID: Two brief calls to inquire about the location of drug dog didn’t constitute abandonment of the stop for investigation

Two brief calls during the traffic stop to inquire about a drug dog were not themselves abandonment of the stop in favor of the dog. It was reasonable at the time and didn’t extend the stop. State v. Still, 2019 Ida. App. LEXIS 30 (Aug. 30, 2019):
Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on ID: Two brief calls to inquire about the location of drug dog didn’t constitute abandonment of the stop for investigation

CA9: Seven hour arrest and detention of decedent’s wife as witness to a police shooting was unreasonable under clearly established law

Plaintiff’s husband was shot by sheriff’s deputies and killed and she was arrested as a material witness, taken away, and held for seven hours–four before any questioning. This was unreasonable under Maxwell v. County of San Diego, 708 F.3d 1075, 1083-84 (9th Cir. 2013), and they get no qualified immunity. Kendrick v. County of San Diego, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26447 (9th Cir. Aug. 30, 2019).*

TSA officers are “law enforcement officers” for purposes of an alleged unreasonable search conducted in a private room and then the filing of alleged retaliatory state charges against the plaintiff. Pellegrino v. United States Transp. Sec. Admin., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26392 (3d Cir. Aug. 30, 2019) (en banc).

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA9: Seven hour arrest and detention of decedent’s wife as witness to a police shooting was unreasonable under clearly established law

W.D.N.C.: Omitted facts for Franks purposes are intentional in one sense, but not presumably intentionally misleading

Omitted facts for Franks purposes are intentional in one sense, but not presumably intentionally misleading. Not every thing the affiant knows makes it in there. Also, citizen informant’s statement defendant was seen with a gun five weeks before the search warrant was issued was not stale. United States v. Hammonds, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148291 (W.D. N.C. Aug. 30, 2019):
Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Staleness | Comments Off on W.D.N.C.: Omitted facts for Franks purposes are intentional in one sense, but not presumably intentionally misleading

OH5: Trial court erred in holding def couldn’t be ordered out of car without RS

The trial court erred in holding that the state trooper had no reason to order defendant out of her car, and the inquiry stopped there. Under Mimms, however, it’s entirely under the officer’s discretion. When he stopped her, her pants were undone which he took as a sign she had just attempted to hide something. When she got of the car, he could see a hard object in her pocket, and she refused a search without a female officer to do it, so he took her to jail. Reversed for reconsideration of the legality of the rest of the stop. State v. Dorsey, 2019-Ohio-3478, 2019 Ohio App. LEXIS 3549 (5th Dist. Aug. 21, 2019).

The CI provided not only information that that defendant had pictures of unclothed underage girls on his computer, but he also provided names of who several were. That was probable cause. State v. Tollis, 2019 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 528 (Aug. 29, 2019).*

Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on OH5: Trial court erred in holding def couldn’t be ordered out of car without RS

The Atlantic: The Supreme Court Is Not Well. And the People Know It.

The Atlantic: The Supreme Court Is Not Well. And the People Know It. by Garrett Epps (“A new guns case reveals that the once-noble institution has died, and we’re left working with its corpse.”)

Posted in SCOTUS | Comments Off on The Atlantic: The Supreme Court Is Not Well. And the People Know It.

WaPo: Pollen ‘nerds’: U.S. government enlists scientists to track drug loads, crack cold cases

WaPo: Pollen ‘nerds’: U.S. government enlists scientists to track drug loads, crack cold cases by Nick Miroff:
Continue reading →

Posted in Scope of search | Comments Off on WaPo: Pollen ‘nerds’: U.S. government enlists scientists to track drug loads, crack cold cases

E.D.Va.: While the “four corners” rule is the standard for evaluating probable cause, the court may go outside the four corners in applying GFE

While the “four corners” rule is the standard for evaluating probable cause, the court may go outside the four corners in applying the good faith exception. Here, the officer had additional information he didn’t include because he’d reasonably thought he’d shown probable cause. This is not the kind of case that Herring expects suppression in. This was a reasonable miscalculation and not a deliberate withholding. Moreover, that which was withheld was inculpatory and not exculpatory. United States v. Lipscomb, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146767 (E.D. Va. Aug. 28, 2019) (this hearing was ordered here):
Continue reading →

Posted in Good faith exception | Comments Off on E.D.Va.: While the “four corners” rule is the standard for evaluating probable cause, the court may go outside the four corners in applying GFE

NJ: Consent two hours later was attenuated from initial unlawful entry

Defendant was subjected to an entry and sweep. Consent two hours later was voluntary as attenuated. What was found didn’t come from the initial entry. State v. Williams, 2019 N.J. Super. LEXIS 138 (Aug. 29, 2019):
Continue reading →

Posted in Attenuation | Comments Off on NJ: Consent two hours later was attenuated from initial unlawful entry