Strieff attenuation doctrine not applied to an unlawful warrantless entry into a house and then finding a warrant on the defendant. State v. Turpin, 2017-Ohio-7435, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 3744, Sept. 1, 2017):
Continue reading →

The government issued letters rogatory to Costa Rica for investigation of a sweepstakes fraud calling the United States from there. Based on the request, the Costa Rican judiciary referred the matter to their department of justice which obtained search warrants. The product of the search warrants were sent to the United States and defendant was indicted here for fraud. Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not challenging the process in Costa Rica which apparently was all authorized by Costa Rican law. A Costa Rican law enforcement officer came to trial to admit the evidence. Pileggi v. United States, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142087 (W.D. N.C. Sept. 1, 2017):
Continue reading →

It violated a Mirandized suspect’s Fifth Amendment rights to direct him to enter the passcode into a properly seized cell phone to unlock it for a search. United States v. Mitchell, 2017 CAAF LEXIS 856 (C.A. A.F. Aug. 30, 2017):
Continue reading →

Defendant who was handcuffed and held to the ground, alternately mumbling and screaming incomprehensibly, and vomiting or choking at times didn’t consent. State v. Osterloh, 2017 Ga. App. LEXIS 396 (Aug. 30, 2017).*

The warrantless entry into defendant’s apartment violated the Fourth Amendment because the officers did not have probable cause to conclude that another individual in the apartment was the occupant of a stolen car or had committed any other crime before they entered the apartment and saw the contraband. The fact that the other individual met the vague description given by an informant and fled upon sight of the officers, without more, was not enough for probable cause to arrest. While the informant’s tip certainly warranted police investigation, further observation and corroboration was required to connect the other individual to the stolen car before officers had probable cause to arrest him. Heitkamp v. State, 2017 Ga. App. LEXIS 397 (Aug. 31, 2017).*

Defendant could not be arrested for refusing to submit to a warrantless urine test during a DUI arrest. State v. Helm, 2017 ND 207, 2017 N.D. LEXIS 213 (Aug. 29, 2017).

Playpen warrant sustained. United States v. Allen, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139038 (D. Conn. March 30, 2017).*

The court credits the officers’ version that defendant consented in writing before the search, not after. United States v. Warwick, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139755 (D. N.M. Aug. 30, 2017).*

Inmate strip searches on leaving a prison garment factory are reasonable security measures. There are tools and other things in the factory that could be turned into weapons. Lewis v. Sec’y of Pub. Safety & Corr., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 16915 (5th Cir. Sept. 1, 2017).

The affidavit for search warrant showed nexus. “The facts of this case, however, do show a connection between the Defendant’s alleged drug activity and the subject property. The affidavit sets forth facts that would show not only that Mr. Sumlin lived at the subject property, but that the car he used to conduct drug transactions had been seen parked at the subject property.” United States v. Sumlin, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139906 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 29, 2017).*

Defendant didn’t have standing to complain that emails were produced by subpoena from a prior company he was involved with. He had no reasonable expectation of privacy in them. United States v. Shkreli, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140150 (E.D. N.Y. May 16, 2017).

After a traffic stop, defendant’s DL came back as suspended indefinitely. The officer called for backup. When that officer arrived, a drug dog was used. The stop converted to arrest, and the use of the drug dog didn’t extend the stop any. United States v. Castillo, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140102 (D. Idaho Aug. 29, 2017).*

Officers saw defendant on the street at 11:40 pm, and they saw what they thought might be a gun in his pocket. They turned around, and he got to his house, stashed the object inside the door, and came back to meet them. They had reasonable suspicion at that point, and looking for the gun was justified under a Michigan v. Long protective weapons search rationale. Until they found it, they did not have probable cause. United States v. Richmond, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138817 (E.D.Wis. April 6, 2017).

The CI’s information was specific, detailed, and corroborated enough to provide at least reasonable suspicion. When defendant was stopped, he consented to a search of the toolbox on his truck by agreeing that the officer could use the keys to unlock it. State v. Kelley, 2017 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 770 (Aug. 28, 2017).*
http://www.tsc.state.tn.us/sites/default/files/kelley_robert_lamaropn.pdf

Playpen warrant sustained. United States v. Halgren, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139562 (W.D. Tex. Aug. 30, 2017).*

There is no constitutional prohibition from a state court issuing a search warrant for cell phone records of a provider doing business in the state even when the records are physically located in another state. Territoriality in the statute applies to the offense, not the object of the search. In re Search Warrant for Records from AT&T, 2017 N.H. LEXIS 167 (June 9, 2017):
Continue reading →

WUNC Public Radio: WATCH: Nurse Roughly Arrested For Following Hospital Protocol, Body Camera Shows by Merritt Kennedy:

A Utah nurse and her attorney have released video footage showing an officer roughly arresting her at University of Utah Hospital in Salt Lake City. They say it amounts to assault.

The video shows an officer aggressively handcuffing nurse Alex Wubbels after she refuses to allow him to draw blood from an unconscious patient.

In a § 1983 case over a search warrant issued during the “John Doe” investigation from Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s tenure as Milwaukee County Executive, the plaintiff’s claim fails on the officers allegedly knowing the thought processes of the judge who issued the warrant allegedly without probable cause (but it was) and a claim over unreasonable execution of the warrant. It was not too broad nor executed unreasonably. Archer v. Chisholm, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 16493 (7th Cir. Aug. 29, 2017):
Continue reading →

When defendant consented to a search of her car, she attempted to remove her purse, and the officer had to honor that as a limitation on the consent. He ordered her to put it back, and that was mere acquiesce to a claim of authority. State v. Greub, 2017 Ida. App. LEXIS 63 (Aug. 29, 2017).

“The government proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the stop was not unreasonably prolonged. … During the first 10 minutes of the stop—from its beginning until the time when Urban received the written warning and denied consent to search—Sgt. Rangel asked questions about topics related to the stop, such as the vehicle’s ownership and the trip itinerary, … 350, and also asked follow-up questions in a “graduated response to emerging facts,” …. This phase of the stop was reasonably related to the circumstances that justified the stop and to dispelling reasonable suspicion developed during the stop. … [¶] And Sgt. Rangel’s decision to detain defendants for an additional eight minutes to conduct the free-air sniff was likewise not unreasonable.” United States v. Urban, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137406 (N.D. Tex. Aug. 28, 2017).*

When defendant, a nonstudent, arrived at school and was surrounded by school officials who smelled of marijuana (a civil offense), the frisk of her backpack was without any reasonable suspicion of criminality or that there was a weapon present. Commonwealth v. Villagran, 477 Mass. 711 (Aug. 29, 2017):
Continue reading →

Above the Law: Issue Spotter: How Many Cops Need To Be Fired Based On These Facts?
If you answer ‘one,’ you fail. YOU are part of the problem.
By Elie Mystal
Continue reading →

“[W]e conclude that the trial court erred by using a subjective rather than objective test in finding that the exigent circumstances were not sufficient to justify the officers’ entering the residence to perform a protective sweep. However, we determine that the police officers’ knocking on the front door for ten to fifteen minutes while announcing their badge of authority rendered the encounter with Ms. Hilliard nonconcensual and the knock and talk investigation unlawful. The subsequent warrantless entry of the residence therefore violated the prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizure under the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and article 1 section 7 of the Tennessee Constitution. The subsequent consent to search given by Ms. Hilliard was not voluntary and resulted from an exploitation of the prior illegality. We, therefore, affirm the judgments of the trial court suppressing the evidence in
these three cases.” State v. Hilliard, 2017 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 774 (Aug. 29, 2017)

Reason.com: In Warrantless Cellphone Search Case, It’s the Trump Administration vs. the 4th Amendment by Damon Root:
Continue reading →

Sharon D. Nelson & John W. Simek, Are Alexa and Her Friends Safe for Office Use?, 43 Law Practice No. 5, 26 (Sept.-Oct. 2017):

The obvious question revolves around the security of these types of devices. Is Alexa safe to use in a law office? That’s a question we get quite often these days. The short answer is yes, if you take certain precautions and understand the pros and cons of the technology.

Defendant sought all kinds of information about how BitTorrent Downpour software worked to search his computer, but he fails to show how it is material to the finding of probable cause on a P2P sharing case. Discovery is denied. United States v. Hoeffener, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137325 (E.D. Mo. Aug. 25, 2017).

Police had reasonable suspicion on the totality to stop defendant. His car was parked on the wrong side of the street facing traffic. The LPN came back to another car. When the police stopped, the defendant angrily approached the police car. United States v. Brice, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137481 (W.D. N.C. Aug. 25, 2017).*

The government proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the dog was well-trained, certified, reliable, and alerted. United States v. Walsh, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137404 (N.D. Tex. Aug. 28, 2017).*

Defendant was stopped by the Coast Guard solely because he was Latino, and it wasn’t a border stop. The court finds it was an egregious violation of the Fourth Amendment, and defendant’s alienage is suppressed. Sanchez v. Sessions, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 16625 (9th Cir. Aug. 30, 2017). Summary by the court:
Continue reading →

Defendant’s decade old cocaine conviction could be a factor in reasonable suspicion for a probation search. United States v. Riley, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 16233 (11th Cir. Aug. 25, 2017).

The district court’s finding that the officers did not use deceit to get consent is supported by the evidence. United States v. Cunningham, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 16301 (11th Cir. Aug. 25, 2017).*