Essentially the only evidence supporting defendant’s conviction came from his search and seizure of evidence. Thus, his § 1983 case over the search is barred by Heck. Anderson v. Houston, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19246 (D.Utah Feb. 5, 2019).*
For the third time now (Presley v. United States, 895 F.3d 1284 (11th Cir. 2018); BMP Family Ltd. P’ship v. United States, 741 Fed. Appx. 764 (11th Cir. 2018)), an IRS summons to a law firm was valid and enforceable under the Fourth Amendment. The law firm can’t use this appeal to resurrect a defaulted issue. Presley & Presley P.A. v. United States, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 3526 (11th Cir. Feb. 5, 2019).*
The use of a cell site simulator with a search warrant to locate defendant’s cell phone was reasonable. The issue on appeal was whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying a motion to continue while the defense tried to learn more about it after the court had already denied a motion to suppress. People v. Johnson, 2019 Cal. App. LEXIS 99 (4th Dist. Feb. 5, 2019).
Defendant’s search claim can’t be presented in habeas. Blaisdell v. Perry, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19292 (W.D. Mich. Jan. 17, 2019).*
Reason.com: The Cops Were the Aggressors in This Week’s Deadly Houston Drug Raid by Jacob Sullum:
Even if Dennis Tuttle and Rhogena Nicholas were selling heroin out of their house, the government’s violent response cannot be morally justified.
A USMJ under Florida v. Harris concludes that the defense successfully rebutted the reliability of a drug dog on the job only one month, and the alert based search was held without probable cause. United States v. Acosta, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17946, 2019 WL 454247 (N.D. Iowa Feb. 5, 2019). (The opinion is long and detailed and too much for here. The court’s online version of the opinion is not yet online at the GPO website.) It is remarkable because a defendant actually prevailed. The FPD for the defense:
Defendants’ stop is found to be based on a hunch and not reasonable suspicion founded on facts. The purported tip is found to be a pretext for the stop. United States v. Hall, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18088 (M.D. Ga. Feb. 5, 2019)*:
The protective sweep of other rooms had no reasonable suspicion justification under Buie that another person might be present. There were two and they were unreasonable. The product of the walk through made it into a search warrant for the premises, and that taints the warrant. Motion to suppress is granted. United States v. Fuentes-Rodriguez, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18225 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 5, 2019).
Plaintiff’s civil Franks claim doesn’t allege or show materiality to the finding of probable cause. Motion to dismiss granted on this and other grounds without prejudice. Gower v. All But Furgotten Humane Rescue a Non Profit Org., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17188 (W.D. Pa. Feb. 4, 2019).*
The court finds that a minimal showing of at least recklessness was made in a representation in the search warrant application that a black cloth had not been disturbed during a crime. The video surveillance shows several people did. On the probable cause showing, however, defendant fails because his DNA was on the cloth “with an error rate of 1 in 138 cotillion.” United States v. North, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18330 (D. Nev. Feb. 5, 2019).
Defendant had his full and fair opportunity to litigate his suppression motion in state court, did, and lost. It can’t now form the basis of a habeas claim. Scott v. Sheldon, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17400 (N.D. Ohio Feb. 4, 2019).*
Obtaining a search warrant with a narrative affidavit, inter alia, is hardly outrageous governmental conduct warranting dismissal. United States v. Ortiz, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17455 (D. Minn. Feb. 4, 2019).*
Plaintiff’s excessive force claim against a probation search which was alleged to have happened when she resisted a search when the officer told her not to go into a room alone while they were there was minimal, de minimus, and reasonable under the circumstances. The probation search was not shown to be unreasonable otherwise with any positive evidence in the face of the officers’ summary judgment motion. Porter v. Munoz, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17686 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 5, 2019).*
Police were called to a motel room because of a loud music complaint. The renter turned the music down, and, with that, the police should have left. Instead they wanted IDs and found a warrant on defendant. There was no basis for a detention at that point, and the subsequent search was invalid. State v. Chisum, 2019 N.J. LEXIS 187 (Feb. 5, 2019). Syllabus by the court:
Officers responded to a drive-by shooting allegedly picked up by ScatterShot. Officers grabbed defendant’s arm ostensibly to see if he’d been shot, and it was readily apparent that he had not been, and he denied it. The community caretaking function is primarily for searches, not really seizures. The government’s authorities don’t support its position. United States v. Johnson, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16858 (D. D.C. Feb. 4, 2019):