WaPo: Never-Googlers: Web users take the ultimate step to guard their data

Posted on July 24, 2019 by Hall

WaPo: Never-Googlers: Web users take the ultimate step to guard their data by Greg Bensinger:

As reports surface regarding how the online advertising giant tracks consumers, some try to reclaim their online footsteps.

Continue reading →

Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on WaPo: Never-Googlers: Web users take the ultimate step to guard their data

NYT: An American Citizen Is Released From Immigration Custody After Nearly a Month

Posted on July 23, 2019 by Hall

NYT: An American Citizen Is Released From Immigration Custody After Nearly a Month by Manny Fernandez
Continue reading →

Posted in Immigration arrests, Immigration checkpoints | Comments Off on NYT: An American Citizen Is Released From Immigration Custody After Nearly a Month

NYT: Barr Revives Encryption Debate, Calling on Tech Firms to Allow for Law Enforcement

Posted on July 23, 2019 by Hall

NYT: Barr Revives Encryption Debate, Calling on Tech Firms to Allow for Law Enforcement by Katie Benner:

The attorney general, reopening the conversation on security vs. privacy, said that encryption and other measures effectively turned devices into “law-free zones.”

Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on NYT: Barr Revives Encryption Debate, Calling on Tech Firms to Allow for Law Enforcement

D.Ariz.: Affidavit of another didn’t show offer of proof for standing

Posted on July 23, 2019 by Hall

The declaration used to attempt to show defendant’s guest standing doesn’t tie defendant’s relationship to the property to the time of the search. Moreover, on the day in question, his truck was parked along a fence far enough from the house that looking in the back of the truck was possible and didn’t show a reasonable expectation of privacy in the back of the truck. United States v. Velasco, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121619 (D. Ariz. June 11, 2019).*

The state appellate court’s application of the state standard of review of fact findings did not deny him a fair opportunity to litigate his search issue in state court under Stone v. Powell. Rodriguez-Olivas v. Director, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121577 (E.D. Tex. June 14, 2019).*

Posted in Abstention, Burden of pleading | Comments Off on D.Ariz.: Affidavit of another didn’t show offer of proof for standing

E.D.Mich.: Ptf’s guilty plea was collateral estoppel to his § 1983 search claim

Posted on July 23, 2019 by Hall

Plaintiff’s civil search claim was barred by collateral estoppel by his guilty plea that there was sufficient evidence to convict. The officer gets qualified immunity for relying on a search warrant. Dabish v. McMahon, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121399 (E.D. Mich. July 22, 2019).*

The district court erred in not granting qualified immunity to an officer whose alleged judicial deception in getting the search warrant wasn’t material to the probable cause. Detention during the search was also entitled to qualified immunity. Advanced Bldg. & Fabrication v. California Highway Patrol, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 21176 (9th Cir. July 17, 2019).*

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Probable cause, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Ptf’s guilty plea was collateral estoppel to his § 1983 search claim

M.D.Fla.: When the automobile exception applies and def is in custody, a SW still isn’t required

Posted on July 23, 2019 by Hall

There was probable cause by a plain view so the automobile exception applies. The fact defendant as in custody doesn’t require a search warrant. United States v. Lightsey, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121669 (M.D. Fla. July 3, 2019).

There was an “eminently reasonable” inference that defendants were engaged in serial shoplifting from a Walmart. After leaving and going to their truck, they went back into the store. There was probable cause. United States v. Vance, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121702 (E.D. Tenn. July 1, 2019),* adopted, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120697 (E.D. Tenn. July 19, 2019).*

The trial court erred in suppressing jail telephone calls obtained by grand jury subpoena. State v. Jackson, 2019 N.J. Super. LEXIS 116 (July 19, 2019).*

Posted in Automobile exception, Prison and jail searches, Probable cause | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: When the automobile exception applies and def is in custody, a SW still isn’t required

OR: “related to controlled substances offenses” in a cell phone SW was not particular

Posted on July 23, 2019 by Hall

The cell phone search warrant was not sufficiently particular under the state constitution because there were no practical limits in the phrase “related to controlled substances offenses.” State v. Savath, 298 Ore. App. 495 (July 17, 2019):
Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Particularity | Comments Off on OR: “related to controlled substances offenses” in a cell phone SW was not particular

The Atlantic: The Stuff of Dystopian Nightmare

Posted on July 22, 2019 by Hall

The Atlantic: The Stuff of Dystopian Nightmare by Garrett Epps:

ACLU lawyers have stopped border agents from demanding ID after domestic flights.

Posted in Immigration checkpoints | Comments Off on The Atlantic: The Stuff of Dystopian Nightmare

OH5: PC is determined on the totality, not each isolated fact

Posted on July 22, 2019 by Hall

Defendant’s challenge to probable cause for the search warrant isolates each fact. Applying the totality of circumstances, there is probable cause. State v. Beightler, 2019-Ohio-2946, 2019 Ohio App. LEXIS 3037 (5th Dist. July 18, 2019).*

Defendant doesn’t meet the Franks threshold. The questioned things are not material, and, even if corrected with all he says that was missing, there still would be probable cause. United States v. Hansen, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119334 (D. Idaho July 18, 2019).*

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause | Comments Off on OH5: PC is determined on the totality, not each isolated fact

VT: Inquest subpoena for video of police involved shooting is a public record

Posted on July 22, 2019 by Hall

A television station sought access to a video of a police involved shooting produced before an inquest. The record is presumptively an open record. “The pivotal question in this case is whether a trial-court order granting a motion to quash a subpoena issued in the context of an inquest is categorically exempt from public disclosure. We hold that the order is a public record presumptively subject to disclosure under the Rules for Public Access to Court Records, and conclude that there is no basis for sealing the record in this case. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s denial of appellant Gray Television, Inc.’s motion to unseal the order.” In re VSP-TK / 1-16-18 Shooting ((Gray Television, Inc.), 2019 VT 47, 2019 Vt. LEXIS 92 (July 19, 2019).

Posted in Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters | Comments Off on VT: Inquest subpoena for video of police involved shooting is a public record

CA9: A state SW executed by a federal officer doesn’t violate 4A

Posted on July 22, 2019 by Hall

A state issued search warrant is not executed in violation of the Fourth Amendment because a federal law enforcement officer executed it. United States v. Cruz-Ramirez, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 21528 (9th Cir. July 19, 2019).

Defendant wasn’t “in custody” when he was questioned in his own home during execution of a search warrant for child pornography. It was a familiar place, neutral, and brief. United States v. Boshoff, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119582 (D. Me. July 18, 2019).*

Posted in Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA9: A state SW executed by a federal officer doesn’t violate 4A

D.Ariz.: Def failed to show standing at the place where he intermittently spent nights but no showing of when

Posted on July 22, 2019 by Hall

Defendant failed to show standing in the home of another. He and his girlfriend had a key to the premises where he intermittently spent the night over a fair stretch of time, but there was no showing of when he was last there and how often. “Velasco describes an intermittent overnight guest status, with no showing that he spent the night before (or even a night within the preceding week or month) the officer looked into the vehicle. Velasco has not cited to any authority establishing an intermittent overnight guest has standing to contest a search. See e.g. Minnesota v. Carter, 525 U.S. 83, 96 (1998) (Scalia, J., joined by Thomas, J., concurring) (although overnight guest status may be at “the absolute limit of what text and tradition permit” under the Fourth Amendment, it is still within the limits of the Fourth Amendment).” United States v. Velasco, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120741 (D. Ariz. July 18, 2019).

Posted in Standing | Comments Off on D.Ariz.: Def failed to show standing at the place where he intermittently spent nights but no showing of when

S.D.Ga.: Oral military search authorizations do not violate 4A or Rule 41

Posted on July 22, 2019 by Hall

Oral search warrant requests and authorizations under M.R.E. 315 do not violate the Fourth Amendment or Rule 41. Many cases so hold. The violation of the SOP manual for military magistrates wasn’t serious enough to justify suppression nor prevent the good faith exception from applying. United States v. Caudle, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119139 (S.D. Ga. June 28, 2019), adopted, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119106 (S.D. Ga. July 17, 2019):
Continue reading →

Posted in Good faith exception, Military searches, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on S.D.Ga.: Oral military search authorizations do not violate 4A or Rule 41

BuzzFeed News: Opinion: Don’t Regulate Facial Recognition. Ban It.

Posted on July 22, 2019 by Hall

BuzzFeed News: Opinion: Don’t Regulate Facial Recognition. Ban It. by Evan Greer:

We are on the verge of a nightmare era of mass surveillance by the state and private companies. It’s not too late to stop it.

Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on BuzzFeed News: Opinion: Don’t Regulate Facial Recognition. Ban It.

The Atlantic: FaceApp Makes Today’s Privacy Laws Look Antiquated

Posted on July 22, 2019 by Hall

The Atlantic: FaceApp Makes Today’s Privacy Laws Look Antiquated by Tiffany C. Li:

Cameras are everywhere, and data brokers are vacuuming up information on individuals. But regulations have not kept pace.

Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on The Atlantic: FaceApp Makes Today’s Privacy Laws Look Antiquated

E.D.Mich.: Second SW issued three weeks after first had no additional information to overcome staleness; no GFE

Posted on July 21, 2019 by Hall

Defendant was the target of a search warrant. Three weeks later, police obtained another search warrant using the prior information attempted to be supplemented by defendant’s Facebook page. There was also a failed controlled buy there. There was insufficient new information to justify the second warrant, and it was stale. The good faith exception doesn’t apply because there were no minimal investigative efforts in between. United States v. Battles, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119353 (E.D. Mich. July 18, 2019):
Continue reading →

Posted in Good faith exception, Staleness | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Second SW issued three weeks after first had no additional information to overcome staleness; no GFE

NY3: No suppression hearing for lack of pleading a factual basis for suppression

Posted on July 21, 2019 by Hall

Defendant was properly denied a suppression hearing for not alleging a factual basis for a suppression motion. People v. Seecoomar, 2019 NY Slip Op 05727, 2019 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5742 (3d Dept. July 18, 2019).*

The stop was justified. Then, “[t]he officers had ample reasonable suspicion to believe that criminal activity, aside from the original traffic violation, was occurring. Defendants were stopped late at night heading in the direction of a neighborhood that was being targeted by Shreveport gang members for vehicle thefts and burglaries. As Defendants were being stopped, they repeatedly reached under the seat as if to hide drugs or retrieve a gun.” Defendant Williams was a passenger without standing. United States v. Jerry, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119530 (W.D. La. July 18, 2019).*

Posted in Burden of pleading, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on NY3: No suppression hearing for lack of pleading a factual basis for suppression

N.D.Ill.: While def was in jail, he caused robbery evidence to be moved to his sister’s house; he’d been in jail a month by then and lacks standing

Posted on July 21, 2019 by Hall

Defendant is accused of robbing an ATM technician. The search warrant for his place in Chicago was based on probable cause, and evidence linking him to the robbery was found there. After jail calls suggested evidence was moved to his sister’s apartment in Joliet, a search warrant was issued for her place. Defendant lacks standing to challenge that search. Whatever his relationship to the property, he hadn’t been there in a month because he was in jail and had no reasonable expectation of privacy there. Even if he did, that search warrant was also issued on probable cause. United States v. Parker, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119348 (N.D. Ill. July 16, 2019):
Continue reading →

Posted in Standing | Comments Off on N.D.Ill.: While def was in jail, he caused robbery evidence to be moved to his sister’s house; he’d been in jail a month by then and lacks standing

No IAC for not moving to suppress where there’s no standing

Posted on July 21, 2019 by Hall

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not pursuing a motion to suppress that the co-defendant already lost on the merits and for which defendant had no standing. State v. Adkins, 2019 Del. Super. LEXIS 335 (July 16, 2019).*

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not moving to suppress this search of another’s hotel room because it’s apparent defendant had no standing. People v. Byrd, 2019 NY Slip Op 05721, 2019 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5741 (3d Dept. July 18, 2019).*

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Standing | Comments Off on No IAC for not moving to suppress where there’s no standing

Cal.1: Application of community caretaking function doesn’t require police to know who is inside; just that somebody reasonably might be

Posted on July 21, 2019 by Hall

The community caretaking function was satisfied here: “Although in the present case the officers were not aware of a specific, known individual who might be in danger or might pose an imminent threat to others, as in some of these cases, the California Supreme Court’s decisions in both Ray and Stamper establish that if the circumstances suggest that such a person may be inside a dwelling, police may reasonably enter to determine whether in fact such a person is present.” People v. Rubio, 2019 Cal. App. LEXIS 653 (1st Dist. July 18, 2019).

Omission of the details of some conversations didn’t undermine probable cause. “The absence of a detailed or fuller description of these conversations hampers the Court’s ability to independently assess the reasonableness of Brennan’s interpretations of the communications. [¶] Although inclusion of such information would have been the better practice, Brennan’s failure to have done so does not invalidate the warrant.” United States v. Billins, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119612 (W.D. N.Y. July 17, 2019),* adopted, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178248 (W.D. N.Y. Oct. 15, 2019).*

Posted in Community caretaking function, Probable cause | Comments Off on Cal.1: Application of community caretaking function doesn’t require police to know who is inside; just that somebody reasonably might be