Reason: Rand Paul Worries Whether Surveillance Reform Will Even Be Debated in Senate by Scott Shackford:
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is concerned his peers will attempt to reauthorize and possibly even expand the federal government’s surveillance powers without any public debate at all.
Wired: Supreme Court’s Cell Phone Tracking Case Could Hurt Privacy by Nick Sibilla
NYTimes: Seeing Danger in a Face by Alex Bastian
SF ADA detained at SFO coming back from Greece and Armenia
Outside the Beltway: Amazon Would Like The Key To Your House by Doug Mataconis: ·
Amazon is preparing to offer a new level of delivery service that would allow delivery persons to gain access to your house so they can leave packages inside:
Continue reading
Defendant had standing to challenge GPS tracking of a car he was loaned by the owner. The search wasn’t a pretext from inventory: there was probable cause for the automobile exception. “A warrantless search can occur even after the automobile is impounded if probable cause and exigent circumstances existed at the time the automobile was seized. Acevedo, 500 U.S. at 570 (citing Chambers, 399 U.S. at 51-52).” United States v. Cabrera, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176982 (D. Nev. Oct. 23, 2017).
Calling for a drug dog during processing the paperwork of a traffic stop that produced a dog sniff before the stop was over was reasonable. United States v. Harry, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174689 (N.D. Iowa Oct. 23, 2017), adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187613 (N.D. Iowa Nov. 14, 2017):
Continue reading
The officer’s belief that driving too long in the left lane of a divided highway was a traffic violation wasn’t reasonable because nothing in the statute allows that construction. Therefore, the stop was invalid. United States v. Buruato, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177043 (S.D. Tex. Oct. 25, 2017).
Plaintiff’s third suit against officers for arresting him for evasion when he refused to submit to a search warrant for DNA was barred by res judicata from losing the first two. Sweat v. Rickards, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 20767 (10th Cir. Oct. 23, 2017).*
Officers believed defendant was involved in a robbery and shot himself. At the ER, defendant lied and gave a false name because he was on probation with a search condition. Defendant’s lie about his identity is an estoppel. He was on probation, he lied about it, and any illegal search he claims wasn’t if the officer knew the truth. People v. Mathews, 2017 Cal. App. LEXIS 932 (1st Dist. Oct. 25, 2017):
Continue reading
Defendant’s window tint was the basis for a stop at night, and the officer got only a “split second” look at the car but couldn’t see inside. That’s at least reasonable suspicion. [Yes, it’s possible.] United States v. Bogan, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175005 (E.D. Wis. Oct. 23, 2017),* R&R 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175916 (E.D. Wis. Sept. 26, 2017).*
Just reading the affidavit for the search warrant, which is all the parties request and all the court is supposed to do, the count finds sufficient indicia of probable cause for the warrant to issue. United States v. Deluna, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175718 (S.D. Tex. Oct. 24, 2017).*
Failure to knock-and-announce was not a Fourth Amendment violation, and defendant gave no justification for extending the state constitution. State v. Robinson, 2017-Ohio-8274, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 4658 (4th Dist. Sept. 27, 2017).
Defendant waived his knock-and-announce claim by not getting a ruling on it from the trial court.
State v. Robinson, 2017-Ohio-8273, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 4659 (4th Dist. Sept. 28, 2017).
Seeing defendant in the house of another was justification for entry into the home to arrest him on a warrant under Steagald. United States v. Terrell, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175483 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 24, 2017).
Defendant was stopped for erratic driving and was apparently under the influence. The officer could smell the faint odor of marijuana. That justified a search of the vehicle under the automobile exception. State v. Donovan, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 1096 (Oct. 24, 2017).*
Defendant was a probation absconder, and he did not have standing to contest a search of another probationer’s camper. Even if defendant did have standing, the probation officers substantially complied with departmental guidelines. Defendant’s presence as an absconder from probation attempting to evade police by hiding in the bathroom of a camper was an exigent circumstance. Thus, an arrest checklist for defendant was not required by departmental guidelines and the arrest did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Aiken v. State, 2017 Del. LEXIS 439 (Oct. 23, 2017).
“On appeal, petitioner argues that the stop was illegal because the deputy lacked a reasonable articulable suspicion to initiate the traffic stop. However, this argument simply ignores the evidence below. It is clear from the record below that the deputy did not initially make a traffic stop of petitioner’s vehicle, given that the vehicle in question was already stopped along the side of the road.” A search warrant issued for the vehicle after that. State v. DeFrietas, 2017 W. Va. LEXIS 802 (Oct. 23, 2017) (memorandum).*
Defendant’s arrest at his threshold when he answered his door was valid. The court declines to overturn its “longstanding rule.” People v. Garvin, 2017 NY Slip Op 07382, 2017 N.Y. LEXIS 3201 (Oct. 24, 2017).
There was reasonable suspicion defendant had threatened somebody and had gang affiliation based on his Facebook posts, so his stop was justified. Nothing developed thereafter, however, to justify a search of his person, so that is suppressed. United States v. Jordan, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176115 (W.D. N.Y. July 14, 2017),* adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175682 (W.D. N.Y. Oct. 24, 2017).*
Search incident of a bag associated with defendant was valid here because defendant wasn’t handcuffed and inside a patrol car. Instead, he was handcuffed and outside the patrol car, and, of course, that’s a big difference. State v. Hughes, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 1091 (Oct. 24, 2017):
Continue reading
EFF: EFF and ACLU Ask Appeals Court to Find Section 702 Surveillance Unconstitutional by Andrew Crocker:
As Congress considers reforming Section 702, the NSA’s warrantless surveillance authority, EFF and ACLU are asking a federal court of appeals in New York to find this surveillance unconstitutional. Section 702 allows the government to collect billions of electronic communications—including those of Americans—and to use these communications in criminal investigations, all without a warrant. Our amicus brief in United States v. Hasbajrami argues that this practice represents an end run around the Fourth Amendment, which protects the privacy of e-mail and other electronic communications.
The state showed nexus to defendant’s laptop and the victim’s murder. Defendant had forged documents on a computer before, and it was reasonable to conclude that similar events happened here by defendant’s hand. Defendant was well experienced in using computers because he had a web design business. The particularity requirement is also satisfied. “Nor does the absence of search protocols mean the warrant lacked particularity for purposes of the Fourth Amendment and art. 14. This court has specifically declined to require search protocols in the past. McDermott, 448 Mass. at 776 (‘Advance approval for the particular methods to be used in the forensic examination of the computers and disks is not necessary’).” And this search warrant was issued eleven years ago. Finally, the warrant was executed reasonably. Commonwealth v. Keown, 2017 Mass. LEXIS 769 (Oct. 23, 2017).
The triggering condition for the anticipatory search warrant was provided for in the warrant, but that’s not constitutionally required. It did not matter that defendant was a guest in the premises. There was a fair probability that the triggering conditions would exist and they were not speculative. Also, the good faith exception applies. State v. Maniaci, 2017-Ohio-8270, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 4655 (3d Dist. Oct. 23, 2017):
Continue reading
Reason: Sens. Rand Paul and Ron Wyden Unveil Long-Awaited, Privacy-Protecting Surveillance Reform Bill by Scott Shackford
The Fourth Amendment matters to some legislators.
