LAT: Fears of racial profiling rise as Border Patrol conducts ‘roving patrols,’ detains U.S. citizens

LAT: Fears of racial profiling rise as Border Patrol conducts ‘roving patrols,’ detains U.S. citizens by Brittny Mejia & Rachel Uranga (“Brian Gavidia had stepped out from working on a car at a tow yard in a Los Angeles suburb Thursday when armed, masked men — wearing vests with ‘Border Patrol’ on them — pushed him up against a metal gate and demanded to know where he was born. ‘I’m American, bro!’ 29-year-old Gavidia pleaded, in video taken by a friend.”).

Posted in Racial profiling | Comments Off on LAT: Fears of racial profiling rise as Border Patrol conducts ‘roving patrols,’ detains U.S. citizens

DE: There was RS for handcuffing and frisk of visitor during a probation search

Defendant was a visitor in a home subjected to a probation search, and his movements and words justified handcuffing him to maintain the status quo and then patting him down. “Therefore, Roane’s behavior created both reasonable, articulable suspicion regarding both criminal activity and a legitimate fear for officer safety, and once the heroin was located, the officers were constitutionally permitted to continue their search incident to arrest which led to the discovery of the crack cocaine.” State v. Roane, 2025 Del. Super. LEXIS 301 (June 13, 2025).

The officer’s drawing his weapon during a nighttime stop was not unreasonable considering he was alone and it didn’t transform the stop into an arrest. Looking at the back seat was reasonable. The smell of marijuana then justified the vehicle search. United States v. Alvarez, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 14656 (11th Cir. June 13, 2025).*

Defendant wasn’t entitled to a Miranda warning before implied consent to a BAC test.
Watters v. State, 2025 Ga. App. LEXIS 243 (June 13, 2025).*

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Probation / Parole search, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on DE: There was RS for handcuffing and frisk of visitor during a probation search

W.D.La.: No REP in state pretrial release GPS connecting def to federal crimes

Defendant was on pretrial release on an unrelated state case. As a condition of release, he agreed to a GPS monitor by a private provider who reported to the court. The government used his location information to connect him to crimes while on release. He both had no reasonable expectation of privacy in his movements and he consented to it. And, “even if the use of the GPS ankle monitor constituted an unconstitutional search, the arrest warrant was based on separate, untainted evidence, and the officers executed the warrant in good faith.” United States v. Mitchell, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112424 (W.D. La. May 28, 2025).

The officer’s drawing his weapon during a nighttime stop was not unreasonable considering he was alone and it didn’t transform the stop into an arrest. Looking at the back seat was reasonable. The smell of marijuana then justified the vehicle search. United States v. Alvarez, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 14656 (11th Cir. June 13, 2025).*

Defendant wasn’t entitled to a Miranda warning before implied consent to a BAC test. Watters v. State, 2025 Ga. App. LEXIS 243 (June 13, 2025).*

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, GPS / Tracking Data, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on W.D.La.: No REP in state pretrial release GPS connecting def to federal crimes

OH1: Protective sweep unjustified; inevitable discovery alternative waived by state by lack of preservation

The protective sweep here was unreasonable because the only gun the officers knew anything about had already been found and there were no people to look for. The trial court erred in overruling the motion to suppress. The state waived inevitable discovery by not presenting it below. State v. Curry, 2025-Ohio-2083 (1st Dist. June 13, 2025).

Nexus is shown: “In this case, the Affidavit of Probable Cause contains direct evidence that establishes a nexus between Defendant, his alleged criminal activity, and the 303 Gardner Street residence. The Affidavit of Probable Cause outlined Defendant’s participation in an ongoing and protracted drug trafficking conspiracy principally involving his brother Akilees, including a controlled purchase of fentanyl at Defendant’s 303 Gardner Street residence from a historically reliable CI.” United States v. Hobson, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112501 (M.D. Pa. June 13, 2025).*

This child pornography warrant wasn’t stale, and it showed probable cause for computers, a vehicle, and his person. And the good faith exception applies in any event. United States v. Allen, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112884 (N.D. Ga. May 22, 2025).* [Note: the opinion says it was called “amazingly stale” in the pleadings. I have yet to read an opinion that a child porn warrant was ever stale. It’s more likely than anything to be kept. I had a client with a 40+ year old collection in every form: pre-computer magazines, films, and on every size and form of computer media.]

Posted in Nexus, Protective sweep, Staleness, Waiver | Comments Off on OH1: Protective sweep unjustified; inevitable discovery alternative waived by state by lack of preservation

SD: Search incident to mental health hold was reasonable; container in pocket could be opened

Defendant was detained on a mental health hold and his pockets were searched. He didn’t contest the search, just the opening of a container, which was reasonable here. State v. Parris, 2025 S.D. 27 (June 13, 2025).

Plaintiff’s decedent was high on PCP and actively resisting and thrashing around while handcuffed. Drive stunning him [using the Taser’s probes] was not unreasonable. Anderson v. Estrada, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 14673 (5th Cir. June 13, 2025).*

Defendant is charged with arson in interstate commerce. With tower dump warrants his cell phone was present in the area of nine of 18 fires when they happened. Then a tracking warrant was obtained for his vehicle. All were with probable cause. A Franks claim is denied because the asserted omission isn’t. United States v. Pricop, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112722 (D. Ariz. June 13, 2025).*

Plaintiff inmate has a possible administrative remedy, but no Fourth Amendment claim. Baltas v. Snyder, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112799 (D. Conn. June 13, 2025).*

Posted in Excessive force, Search incident, Tracking warrant | Comments Off on SD: Search incident to mental health hold was reasonable; container in pocket could be opened

N.D.Ga.: Despite a technical mistake in this geofence warrant, it’s sustained under GFE

The charge is murder in aid of racketeering, and a geofence warrant was used. The process is described below, and the application was defective at step 2, but not so defective that the good faith exception didn’t apply. At the end, below, the court talks about the reasonable expectation of privacy in CSLI records. United States v. Brown, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112603 (N.D. Ga. June 13, 2025):

Continue reading
Posted in geofence | Comments Off on N.D.Ga.: Despite a technical mistake in this geofence warrant, it’s sustained under GFE

WaPo: Meta AI users confide on sex, God and Trump. Some don’t know it’s public.

WaPo: Meta AI users confide on sex, God and Trump. Some don’t know it’s public. by Naomi Nix & Nitasha Tiku (“Some people are unwittingly posting their private and sometimes mortifying conversations with the Meta AI chatbot to the world.”)

Posted in Digital privacy | Comments Off on WaPo: Meta AI users confide on sex, God and Trump. Some don’t know it’s public.

Update: 23andMe sold privately

23andMe sold to private bidder. Exclusive | Anne Wojcicki Wins Bid to Buy 23andMe for $305 Million – WSJ

Posted in DNA | Comments Off on Update: 23andMe sold privately

LAT: States sue to block the sale of genetic data collected by DNA testing company 23andMe

LAT: States sue to block the sale of genetic data collected by DNA testing company 23andMe by Caroline Petrow-Cohen (“Dozens of states have filed a joint lawsuit against the bankrupt DNA-testing company 23andMe to block the company’s sale of its customers’ genetic data without explicit consent. The suit, filed this week in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in the Eastern District of Missouri, comes months after 23andMe began a court-supervised sale process of its assets. The South San Francisco-based venture was once valued at $6 billion and has collected DNA samples from more than 15 million customers.”) [My fear is that CODIS will buy it. Apparently, the government hasn’t thought of it yet.’

Posted in DNA | Comments Off on LAT: States sue to block the sale of genetic data collected by DNA testing company 23andMe

CA8: In a consent search of a car, picking up cell phone and seeing lit screen wasn’t an unreasonable search

“Did Trooper Rorie’s 20 seconds of questioning and request for consent prolong the stop beyond the time needed to complete the remaining tasks of the traffic stop? We hold that it did not. The brief duration of the inquiry within the reasonable period of the traffic stop’s original purpose did not impermissibly prolong it.” When defendant consented to the officer searching his car, the officer’s picking up his cellphone was not a search of the phone. The screen only lit up, and that did not violate Arizona v. Hicks because of the consent. United States v. Puckett, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 14316 (8th Cir. June 11, 2025).

For Rodriguez, “The Court recognizes that traffic stops on Indian reservations inevitably take longer due to the complexities of police power on reservations and the need to alert non-tribal police officers to issue traffic infractions to non-tribal members.” United States v. Severns, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110978 (D. Mont. June 11, 2025).

Because the investigation is still open, the target can’t yet get access to the sealed search warrant affidavit. In re Sealed Search Warrant Application, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108643 (S.D. Tex. June 9, 2025).*

Posted in Cell phones, Consent, Reasonableness, Search, Warrant papers | Comments Off on CA8: In a consent search of a car, picking up cell phone and seeing lit screen wasn’t an unreasonable search

CA10: Ptf has burden on “clearly established law” and failed

The plaintiff in a § 1983 case has the burden on clearly established law, and here the showing completely failed. “Anemic.” Bailey v. Beale, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 14449 (10th Cir. June 12, 2025).*

“[T]he individual officers did not violate clearly established law because at least one of the charges was supported by probable cause.” Rasawehr v. Grey, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 14430 (6th Cir. June 10, 2025).*

“As Carter acknowledges, the Fourth Amendment requires analysis of the totality of the circumstances, and, as the Supreme Court has reiterated, the totality-of-the-circumstances approach ‘precludes this sort of divide-and-conquer analysis.’ See United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266, 274 (2002); … Under the totality of the circumstances, Carter was inconsistent with police officers and had inside knowledge about the crime. These facts taken together are sufficient to support a finding of probable cause. … Carter also does not point to any materially false facts or omissions that would negate the finding of probable cause. Without such facts or omissions, this Court cannot infer a reckless disregard for the truth. … Carter has not carried his burden to plead a constitutional violation. Thus, the district court properly held that Ludwick and Kious are entitled to qualified immunity on Carter’s false arrest claim.” Carter v. Ludwick, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 14436 (8th Cir. June 12, 2025).*

Posted in Burden of pleading, Probable cause, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA10: Ptf has burden on “clearly established law” and failed

E.D.Okla.: Entry to look for shooting victim was reasonable

Officer’s entry to look for a potential shooting victim was reasonable on exigent circumstances. United States v. Bird, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112088 (E.D. Okla. May 7, 2025).*

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not challenging defendant’s taking DNA by warrant. The warrant was based on a cold CODIS hit and a follow-up warrant was sought. The challenge would fail. Wood v. Schiebner, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 14519 (6th Cir. June 11, 2025).*

Officers had an arrest warrant for defendant and went to his house, but he wasn’t home. They had information he used his vehicle in burglaries. They waited, and an APLR alert showed where he was. When he got home, they searched his car because it was present for burglaries. The seizure and search of the vehicle was reasonable. McGinnis v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 4023 (Tex. App. – Dallas June 4, 2025)* (unpublished).

Defendant’s parole search was with reasonable suspicion and was conducted reasonably. United States v. Robinson, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111571 (N.D. Ohio June 12, 2025).*

Posted in Automobile exception, DNA, Emergency / exigency, Ineffective assistance, Probation / Parole search, Search incident | Comments Off on E.D.Okla.: Entry to look for shooting victim was reasonable

TX3: Ordered destruction of LivePD raw video didn’t justify dismissing obstruction indictment of sheriff and ADA

Destruction of A&E LivePD raw video didn’t justify dismissing defendants’ indictment. Defendants were an ADA and the sheriff. State v. Nassour, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 4047 (Tex. App. – Austin June 13, 2025):

Continue reading
Posted in Discovery | Comments Off on TX3: Ordered destruction of LivePD raw video didn’t justify dismissing obstruction indictment of sheriff and ADA

SCOTUS: FTCA applies to raid of the wrong house, remanded to CA11

After federal law enforcement officers raided the wrong house, which should have been evident at the time, the occupants stay in court on their FTCA claim and get to litigate the negligence claim. Martin v. United States, 2025 U.S. LEXIS 2281 (U.S. June 12, 2025). ScotusBlog is here. From the holding in the Syllabus:

Continue reading
Posted in SCOTUS, Warrant execution | Comments Off on SCOTUS: FTCA applies to raid of the wrong house, remanded to CA11

CA2: Def’s GF using passcode to open his phone in presence of police wasn’t a governmental search

In a child pornography case, defendant’s girlfriend was not acting as an agent of the police when she used his passcode to open his phone in the presence of an officer. United States v. Hines, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 14336 (2d Cir. June 11, 2025):

Continue reading
Posted in Cell phones, Private search | Comments Off on CA2: Def’s GF using passcode to open his phone in presence of police wasn’t a governmental search

WaPo: New Orleans pushes to legalize police use of ‘facial surveillance’

WaPo: New Orleans pushes to legalize police use of ‘facial surveillance’ by Douglas MacMillan
(“New Orleans is considering easing restrictions on the police use of facial recognition, weeks after The Washington Post reported that police there secretly relied on a network of AI-powered surveillance cameras to identify suspects on the street and arrest them. According to the draft of a proposed ordinance posted to a city website, police would be permitted to use automated facial recognition tools to identify and track the movements of wanted subjects, missing people or suspected perpetrators of serious crimes — reversing the city’s broad prohibition against using facial recognition as a ‘surveillance tool.’ … If the rule passes, New Orleans would become the first U.S. city to formally allow facial recognition as a tool for surveilling residents in real time.”)

Posted in Facial recognition | Comments Off on WaPo: New Orleans pushes to legalize police use of ‘facial surveillance’

N.D.Ind.: Pro se def’s post-trial motion to dismiss for 4A issue he didn’t fully appreciate timely is denied

Pro se defendant can’t raise a post-trial Fourth Amendment claim because he didn’t fully understand the FBI 302 discussing the search. “What Defendant is experiencing are the real-world consequences that he was warned of when he elected to proceed pro se. The ability to read and understand discovery materials, and to make timely objections based on those materials, are the hallmarks of criminal defense advocacy. Defendant, understandably, lacked those skills. But that’s not a basis for relief. Defendant cannot raise his Fourth Amendment claim now, and his request for relief based on that claim is denied.” United States v. Cox, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110706 (N.D. Ind. June 11, 2025).

Pro se motion to dismiss for a Franks violation is denied as untimely and not making the required “substantial preliminary showing.” United States v. Mayfield, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110451 (N.D. Iowa June 11, 2025).*

“Ms. Gray’s arguments to suppress evidence lack the required specificity to raise a Fourth Amendment challenge.” United States v. Gray, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110928 (E.D. Mo. May 1, 2025).

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on N.D.Ind.: Pro se def’s post-trial motion to dismiss for 4A issue he didn’t fully appreciate timely is denied

CA11: “[T]he presence of contradictory evidence does not bar a finding of probable cause”; It must refute it

“[T]he presence of contradictory evidence does not bar a finding of probable cause.” It must refute it. Scott v. City of Miami, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 14381 (11th Cir. June 11, 2025):

Continue reading
Posted in Probable cause | Comments Off on CA11: “[T]he presence of contradictory evidence does not bar a finding of probable cause”; It must refute it

D.Mont.: Civil demand for BAC test in Indian country did not violate HIPAA

The FBI’s civil demand from the BIA for BAC records from a hospital did not violate HIPAA. United States v. Cree Medicine, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110982 (D. Mont. June 11, 2025):

Continue reading
Posted in Privileges, Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters | Comments Off on D.Mont.: Civil demand for BAC test in Indian country did not violate HIPAA

ABA: Stop and Frisk: Appropriate or Unconstitutional?

ABA: Stop and Frisk: Appropriate or Unconstitutional? by Oran Lott Bullock & Yolanda Means (“Stop and frisk is both a symbol of proactive policing and a flashpoint for civil liberties advocates. Central to the debate is the threshold of ‘reasonable suspicion.’ Reasonable suspicion was introduced in the 1968 U.S. Supreme Court case Terry v. Ohio as a significant exception to the Fourth Amendment’s probable cause requirement. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment becomes relevant when stop and frisk practices disproportionately affect certain racial or ethnic groups. Police officers need comprehensive training that includes implicit bias recognition, de-escalation techniques, and clear guidelines on articulating reasonable suspicion.”)

Posted in Stop and frisk | Comments Off on ABA: Stop and Frisk: Appropriate or Unconstitutional?