S.D.Ill.: To claim denial of consent over cotenant under Randolph, def has to prove something; here nothing

Defendant’s co-tenant, away from the premises, consented to a search. Defendant was there and alleges in the motion he protested the consent search. Under Randolph, “Absent exigent circumstances, a warrantless search of a home based on a co-tenant’s consent is unreasonable in the face of a present tenant’s express objection. Once the objecting tenant leaves, however, social expectations shift, and the tenant assumes the risk that a co-tenant may allow the police to enter even knowing that the tenant would object or continue to object if present. Both presence and objection by the tenant are required to render a consent search unreasonable as to him.” The officers testified that he never objected, and defendant didn’t testify at the suppression hearing. Therefore, the court finds defendant did not object. United States v. Thornton, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 184141 (S.D. Ill. Nov. 6, 2017).

Posted in Consent | Comments Off on S.D.Ill.: To claim denial of consent over cotenant under Randolph, def has to prove something; here nothing

CA7: Hot pursuit of a purported drug dealer into ptf’s house was valid under Santana

The police approached a young man on the street in an area known for drug trade to talk to him. He “turned on his heels” and fled, with the police in pursuit, right to plaintiffs’ house, past one plaintiff out front, and locked the door. The hot pursuit entry was lawful under Santana. The plaintiff outside tried to get his keys out to let the police in, but they knocked down the door instead. The trial and appeal was over whether the young man’s guilty plea to his drug crime was admissible or not to show the police had cause to chase him in the first place and other evidentiary issues. White v. Hefel, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 22259 (7th Cir. Nov. 7, 2017).

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Hot pursuit | Comments Off on CA7: Hot pursuit of a purported drug dealer into ptf’s house was valid under Santana

W.D.Ky.: Lack of detail in a report on a knock-and-talk didn’t amount to a material omission for Franks purposes

A Franks challenge requires affidavits or other sworn testimony as an offer of proof. Franks, 438 U.S. at 171. Defendant doesn’t provide any. On the merits of the search and seizure claim, it started with a knock-and-talk, and they are generally valid, and defendant doesn’t explain why this one isn’t. “The fact that the search warrant affidavit did not contain specific information about whether the law enforcement officers knocked promptly at the front door, waited to be received, and then left does not necessarily evidence a material omission.” United States v. Boone, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 183424 (W.D. Ky. Oct. 11, 2017), adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 183147 (W.D. Ky. Nov. 3, 2017).

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on W.D.Ky.: Lack of detail in a report on a knock-and-talk didn’t amount to a material omission for Franks purposes

VA: “You can’t do that. You can’t search my car.” not per se violation of 4A and it’s admissible to show possession [by the only person in possession]

There is no per se rule that “You can’t do that. You can’t search my car.” was a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Under traditional 403 probative value v. prejudice balancing, the trial court did not err in admitting it in a bench trial because it was probative to prove defendant’s possession. [Well, the officers smelled marijuana coming from defendant’s car in a convenience store parking lot, and he was the only one in it. In addition, while the court finds it not a per se violation of the Fourth Amendment, it does not analyze the Fourth Amendment question at all and subordinates it to Rule 403.] Ames v. Commonwealth, 2017 Va. App. LEXIS 277 (Nov. 7, 2017) (unpublished):
Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of proof | Comments Off on VA: “You can’t do that. You can’t search my car.” not per se violation of 4A and it’s admissible to show possession [by the only person in possession]

Texas Observer: Documents: Texas National Guard Installed Cellphone Spying Devices on Surveillance Planes

Texas Observer: Documents: Texas National Guard Installed Cellphone Spying Devices on Surveillance Planes by G.W. Schulz & Melissa del Bosque:

The Texas National Guard last year spent more than $373,000 to install controversial cellphone eavesdropping devices in secretive surveillance aircraft.

Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on Texas Observer: Documents: Texas National Guard Installed Cellphone Spying Devices on Surveillance Planes

Hofstra Chronicle: Opinion: Big Brother is watching – The future of police surveillance

Hofstra Chronicle: Opinion: Big Brother is watching – The future of police surveillance by Delilah Gray:
Continue reading →

Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on Hofstra Chronicle: Opinion: Big Brother is watching – The future of police surveillance

N.D.Cal.: Parking on the wrong side of the street justifies a traffic stop

Defendant’s car didn’t appear (at first because it was compliant) to have a paper temporary tag. It was also parked on the opposite side of the street where it was facing oncoming traffic in violation of the traffic laws. That alone justified a stop after the officer saw the vehicle pull away. “The existence of a permit also does not dispel concern that the car was parked the wrong way.” The court cites Rodriguez on the potential length of the stop. United States v. Harris, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182890 (N.D. Cal. April 18, 2017).

Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on N.D.Cal.: Parking on the wrong side of the street justifies a traffic stop

OH3: Search incident under Gant isn’t automatic in a DUI arrest; more indicators required

OVI (DUI) is not an offense where there is per se evidence to be found in the vehicle by search incident under Gant (or the automobile exception). Something more than just the offense is required to use the stop to get into the car: i.e., something visible through the window, maybe; furtive movements? Here it was heroin, and it was ordered suppressed. [Unanswered, however, is how inventory will play into this because, as a matter of course, DUI arrests lead to a tow and inventory. Inventory was not the issue here.] State v. Eversole, 2017-Ohio-8436, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 4835 (3d Dist. Nov. 6, 2017):
Continue reading →

Posted in Automobile exception, Inventory, Search incident | Comments Off on OH3: Search incident under Gant isn’t automatic in a DUI arrest; more indicators required

CA6: Auto exception continues to place of inventory; heroin found by plain feel

Defendant’s car was pulled over for a missing license plate and overtinting. The “plain” smell of marijuana was evident, and he was removed from the car for a patdown. The patdown revealed heroin by plain feel, which was valid. The car was removed for inventory. There was enough to search it on the street, and that continued to the inventory. The search warrant for the house was based on two months of information. United States v. Williams, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 23986 (6th Cir. May 10, 2016).

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not challenging the government’s peer-to-peer entry into defendant’s computer files. Smith v. United States, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182930 (W.D. La. Sept. 15, 2017).*

Posted in Automobile exception, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on CA6: Auto exception continues to place of inventory; heroin found by plain feel

Chicago Sun-Times: After body cameras on Chicago cops, could gun cameras be next?

Chicago Sun-Times: After body cameras on Chicago cops, could gun cameras be next? by Mitch Dudek:

All Chicago police officers on patrol will be wearing chest-mounted body cameras by the end of the year — but could gun-mounted cameras be next?

Posted in Body cameras | Comments Off on Chicago Sun-Times: After body cameras on Chicago cops, could gun cameras be next?

Corporate Counsel: The Employee Privacy Risks of Company Chips

Corporate Counsel: The Employee Privacy Risks of Company Chips by Amanda Ciccatelli:
Continue reading →

Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on Corporate Counsel: The Employee Privacy Risks of Company Chips

Daily Business Review: The Right To Be Secure Against Unreasonable Search and Seizure of Overseas Electronic Data?

Daily Business Review: The Right To Be Secure Against Unreasonable Search and Seizure of Overseas Electronic Data? by ​Justin Guido

A U.S. based company receives a warrant from the U.S. government issued under the Stored Communications Act. As part of a criminal investigation, the warrant seeks production of email content.

Posted in Stored Communications Act | Comments Off on Daily Business Review: The Right To Be Secure Against Unreasonable Search and Seizure of Overseas Electronic Data?

GA: Reasonable mistake of law doesn’t mean “good working order” statute requires an interior mirror on a truck; nothing at all in statute on that

The reasonable mistake of law field encounters a new one: Does a truck have to have an inside rearview mirror when under the “good working order” statute? No, and concluding otherwise is not reasonable. The statute doesn’t even come close. Abercrombie v. State, 2017 Ga. App. LEXIS 560 (Nov. 3, 2017):
Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonableness | Comments Off on GA: Reasonable mistake of law doesn’t mean “good working order” statute requires an interior mirror on a truck; nothing at all in statute on that

OR: Def’s motion to suppress that he was subjected to an “unlawful warrantless arrest” sufficiently put the state on notice that it had to show PC

Defendant was walking four blocks from the area of a disturbance talking on a cell phone. When officers confronted him and commanded he stop, he “bladed up” and reached for a back pocket, making the officers fear he was armed. They drew their weapons and handcuffed him, and frisked him finding no weapon. His arrest at that point was without probable cause. Defendant’s motion to suppress that he was subjected to an “unlawful warrantless arrest” sufficiently put the state on notice that it had to show probable cause since that shifted the burden to the state. State v. Sepulveda, 288 Ore. App. 632, 2017 Ore. App. LEXIS 1346 (Nov. 1, 2017).

Plaintiff is a California inmate and he alleges that California Correctional Health Care Services violated his Fourth Amendment rights when a work laptop of an employee was stolen. This does not allege a Fourth Amendment violation. Moreover, whether his health information was on the computer is speculative and doesn’t state a case or controversy. Pavageau v. Cal. Corr. Health Care Servs., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182186 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2017).*

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Burden of pleading, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on OR: Def’s motion to suppress that he was subjected to an “unlawful warrantless arrest” sufficiently put the state on notice that it had to show PC

D.Mont.: No REP in a jail call

Defendant’s recorded jail call did not afford him an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy. His reliance on a Montana case on another issue not at all like this that did recognize a limited reasonable expectation of privacy under the Montana Constitution doesn’t even apply, both because the Fourth Amendment controls and because it’s nowhere on point. Alternatively, this was by consent because he knew it would be recorded. United States v. Cox, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182036 (D. Mont. Oct. 3, 2017).

Defendant’s guilty plea waived his suppression issue. State v. Bennett, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 4825 (1st Dist. Nov. 3, 2017).*

Posted in Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on D.Mont.: No REP in a jail call

EFF: Sen. Feinstein Supports “Backdoor” Warrants, So Why Don’t Reps. Nunes and Schiff?

EFF: Sen. Feinstein Supports “Backdoor” Warrants, So Why Don’t Reps. Nunes and Schiff? by David Ruiz:

As the deadline for renewing and reforming key portions of the NSA’s spying apparatus looms less than two months away, two of the most important members of the House Intelligence Committee have stayed remarkably quiet in the conversation.

Posted in FISA | Comments Off on EFF: Sen. Feinstein Supports “Backdoor” Warrants, So Why Don’t Reps. Nunes and Schiff?

ID: Trial court suppressed forced catheterization of OUI suspect in hospital (not an issue on appeal)

The trial court suppressed a forced catheterization of defendant in her OUI case as exceeding her consent. It wasn’t clear whether it was for law enforcement or medical purposes. This wasn’t an issue on appeal (for good reason because it appears the state would have lost). State v. Diaz, 2017 Ida. App. LEXIS 87 (Nov. 2, 2017).

Posted in Body searches | Comments Off on ID: Trial court suppressed forced catheterization of OUI suspect in hospital (not an issue on appeal)

OR: Def bystander to a school shooting scene wasn’t subject to a frisk: no RS or other exception applies from refusal to make eye contact with officer

Defendant heard there was a shooting at a high school his sister attended, so he armed himself and went down there. The students coming out were frisked to make sure that any shooter did not escape with the students. Defendant was hanging around and wouldn’t make eye-contact with an officer, so the officer went to talk to him and he said he didn’t “know where to go.” He was frisked and his gun was found, but the court finds that no exception to the warrant requirement applies: not consent, emergency aid, or school grounds. His refusal to make eye contact wasn’t reasonable suspicion. State v. Powell, 288 Ore. App. 660, 2017 Ore. App. LEXIS 1350 (Nov. 1, 2017).

Defendant’s car was found out of gas on a highway on tribal lands, and a tribal officer came upon them about dawn. He drove one of them to get gas, and, at the gas station, he encountered another from the car who had gotten a ride to get gas that nobody mentioned. He found this unusual. The officer returned alone. Back at the car, he talked with the occupants, and reasonable suspicion developed from various sources, including fake names. A drug dog was called, and it alerted. The beginning of the encounter was consensual until reasonable suspicion developed. Searches valid. United States v. Espinosa, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181086 (D. S.D. May 23, 2017).*

Posted in Consent, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on OR: Def bystander to a school shooting scene wasn’t subject to a frisk: no RS or other exception applies from refusal to make eye contact with officer

CA9: Def’s wife was a private actor turning over his hard drive to the police

Defendant’s wife was not acting as an agent of the government when she turned over his hard drive to the police. The search warrant they obtained was clearly issued on probable cause. United States v. Wolff, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 21822 (9th Cir. Oct. 31, 2017), aff’g 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140073 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 14, 2015).

“[A]t this time the Court declines to adopt Judge Otazo-Reyes’s recommendation that the motion to suppress be denied and remands this matter to Judge Otazo-Reyes to conduct an evidentiary hearing on the limited issue of whether the (224) iPhone was turned on and searched prior to the issuance of the search warrant for that phone.” United States v. Esformes, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180696 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 31, 2017),* R&R 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181133 (C.D. Fla. Sept. 25, 2017).*

Posted in Cell phones, Private search | Comments Off on CA9: Def’s wife was a private actor turning over his hard drive to the police

D.S.D.: Was all this a “reasonable” mistake under Heien? Doesn’t matter because there was RS for other reasons

The court goes on at length about the reasonableness of the officers’ interpretation of use of a turn signal and the application of the state “practicable lane” statute under the reasonableness standard of Heien, then concludes there was reasonable suspicion on other grounds. United States v. Spaid, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179505 (D.S.D. Sept. 19, 2017)*:
Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.S.D.: Was all this a “reasonable” mistake under Heien? Doesn’t matter because there was RS for other reasons