CO: Officers had clear indication def had drugs in mouth for body search on exigency

There was a clear indication that defendant had hidden drugs in his mouth, and that was exigency for a search of his mouth. When the state as appellee argues there is probable cause for defendant’s arrest and the opening brief wasn’t clear, the defendant must answer in reply or it’s conceded. People v. Carr, 2016 COA 168, 2016 Colo. App. LEXIS 1611 (Nov. 17, 2016):
Continue reading →

Posted in Body searches, Burden of proof | Comments Off on CO: Officers had clear indication def had drugs in mouth for body search on exigency

NJ rejects the state’s prior subjective inadvertence requirement of the plain view doctrine

The prior subjective inadvertence requirement of the plain view doctrine is rejected prospectively only. State v. Gonzales, 2016 N.J. LEXIS 1177 (Nov. 15, 2016) (summary by the court):
Continue reading →

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on NJ rejects the state’s prior subjective inadvertence requirement of the plain view doctrine

CA11: Arguable probable cause entitles the officer to qualified immunity

Arguable probable cause entitles the officer to qualified immunity, here for a mental health seizure. May v. City of Nahunta, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 20501 (11th Cir. Nov. 15, 2016), same result on rehearing, May v. City of Nahunta, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 985 (11th Cir. Jan. 19, 2017) (posted here).

Defendant was arrested on an arrest warrant. He argued that the police didn’t have probable cause to believe that he was the person named in the warrant [he was]. Since even arrest of the wrong person with an arrest warrant can be reasonable under Hill v. California, then surely the arrest of the right person on less than a certainty is reasonable, too. United States v. Mackin, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156889 (N.D.Ind. Nov. 14, 2016).*

The record doesn’t support the trial court’s finding of a lack of consent for a BAC test; the only evidence is to the contrary. State v. Clay, 2016 Ga. App. LEXIS 648 (Nov. 15, 2016).*

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Arrest or entry on arrest, Qualified immunity, Standards of review | Comments Off on CA11: Arguable probable cause entitles the officer to qualified immunity

WA prescription drug monitoring program doesn’t violate 4A or state const’l rights of physicians

The Washington prescription drug monitoring program records do not violate the Fourth Amendment or state constitutional rights of physicians. Alsager v. Bd. of Osteopathic Med. & Surgery, 2016 Wash. App. LEXIS 2768 (Nov. 15, 2016):
Continue reading →

Posted in Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off on WA prescription drug monitoring program doesn’t violate 4A or state const’l rights of physicians

MA: Officer’s observation of obvious drug transaction by car pulling up on street was PC

The experienced police officer’s observation of defendant reaching into a car with Maine LPN was consistent with “car meets” for drug sales, and that was probable cause. Commonwealth v. Sanders, 2016 Mass. App. LEXIS 164 (Nov. 15, 2016).

Plaintiff complained that the AG’s office requiring filing with them of an IRS schedule of charitable trusts violates the First Amendment right of free association. A Fourth Amendment claim is also filed, but it fails for lack of support and also appears reasonable on its face. But, the First Amendment argument is clear enough. “This Court discussed above the legitimacy of the Attorney General’s interest in protecting the public from illegal activities of charitable organizations. In her attempt to further that interest, the Attorney General requests information from all charitable organizations registered in the state. These requests are not unreasonable. This Court has found that the disclosure requirement is overly burdensome in the freedom of association context, but it is not prepared to find it unreasonable in the context of the Fourth Amendment. Given the lack of unreasonableness shown by TMLC, this Court need not determine whether a search occurred within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment.” Thomas More Law Ctr. v. Harris, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158851 (C.D.Cal. Nov. 16, 2016).

Posted in Administrative search, Probable cause | Comments Off on MA: Officer’s observation of obvious drug transaction by car pulling up on street was PC

IN: Seizure of person justified under community caretaking function

A seizure of the person may be justified under the community caretaking function when the person appears so intoxicated or out of it that he’s a danger to himself or others. McNeal v. State, 2016 Ind. App. LEXIS 408 (Nov. 14, 2016):
Continue reading →

Posted in Community caretaking function | Comments Off on IN: Seizure of person justified under community caretaking function

Cal.3d: This suspicionless parole search wasn’t unreasonable or harassing

While a suspicionless search condition can be harassing and thus unreasonable, this one wasn’t. People v. Perkins, 2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 980 (3d Dist. Nov. 14, 2016):
Continue reading →

Posted in Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on Cal.3d: This suspicionless parole search wasn’t unreasonable or harassing

W.D.Ark.: Search for electronic evidence can be intense; digital media can be “mere centimeters long”

A search for digital evidence in a Facebook threat case led to a plain view of firearms and drugs, and the search was valid. The digital evidence could have been on flash drives “mere centimeters long” and that permitted an intense search. The guns, however, were in plain view in the house. There was probable cause for the warrant, and the good faith exception would apply in any event. United States v. Crawford, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156755 (W.D.Ark. Nov. 10, 2016).

Calling out to defendant as he walked by a police car asking whether he had a gun on him was not a seizure. There was no showing of force. See United States v. Gross, 415 U.S. App. D.C. 1, 784 F.3d 784 (D.C. Cir. 2015), United States v. Miller, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156639 (D.D.C. Nov. 11, 2016).*

Posted in Computer and cloud searches, Seizure | Comments Off on W.D.Ark.: Search for electronic evidence can be intense; digital media can be “mere centimeters long”

VA ABC agent correctly fired for violating pending licensee’s rights during administrative search

Appellant was an ABC officer terminated for violating the Fourth Amendment rights of a pending licensee by searching in excess of their government’s ability to administratively search or the pending licensee’s consent. The termination decision was affirmed. He argued the legality of his searches underlying the discharge and lost because they were excessive searches. Osburn v. Va. Dept. of Alcoholic Beverage Control, 2016 Va. App. LEXIS 305 (Nov. 15, 2016).

Defendant didn’t have standing to challenge the search of the car he was a passenger in. The stop yes, but the search no. United States v. Johnson, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156970 (M.D.Pa. Nov. 14, 2016).*

Another Playpen warrant sustained. United States v. Kienast, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157154 (E.D.Wis. Nov. 14, 2016).*

Posted in Administrative search, Standing | Comments Off on VA ABC agent correctly fired for violating pending licensee’s rights during administrative search

FLETC training website link added

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Resources added to the research materials on the right side

Be sure to check your state law enforcement training schedules. In Arkansas, first year training includes 2 hours on search and seizure law. I did an appeal where somebody else did the suppression hearing, and the only thing the cops could talk about was “inventory” because they were convinced if they said “inventory” enough times a court would buy it.

They learn more in advanced classes, of course, but only when they’ve been around for a while or they’ve moved to CID or drugs.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on FLETC training website link added

OH11: Trial court’s finding of no RS to delay the stop was clearly erroneous

The trial court’s finding that the officer delayed the stop without reasonable suspicion is clearly erroneous because the record does not support the finding. State v. Taylor, 2016-Ohio-7745, 2016 Ohio App. LEXIS 4613 (11th Dist. Nov. 14, 2016):
Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Standards of review | Comments Off on OH11: Trial court’s finding of no RS to delay the stop was clearly erroneous

CA5: “criminal activity underfoot” was reasonable suspicion

Court seemingly confuses “criminal activity a foot” with “criminal activity underfoot.” Leaving a gun in a stranger’s car here was reasonable suspicion for further action. United States v. Cook, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 20339 (5th Cir. Nov. 11, 2016):
Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA5: “criminal activity underfoot” was reasonable suspicion

WSJ: Cellphone Smudges Yield a Trove of Forensic Data

WSJ: Cellphone Smudges Yield a Trove of Forensic Data by Robert Lee Hotz:

Researchers say molecules and microbes left on phone, keys, credit cards can linger for months.

Posted in Cell phones | Comments Off on WSJ: Cellphone Smudges Yield a Trove of Forensic Data

ID: Officer writing ticket providing backup to drug dog abandoned traffic ticket making it a criminal investigation; suppressed

The officer’s delaying of the traffic stop for 2½ minutes while performing a back-up function for a drug dog sweep violated defendant’s rights under the Fourth Amendment, because the seizure, initially valid based on a cracked windshield, became unreasonable after the officer abandoned the purpose of the seizure in order to aid in the search for drugs. State v. Linze, 2016 Ida. LEXIS 354 (Nov. 10, 2016).

A Franks allegation here fails on the merits because it didn’t matter. The separate CIs’ stories corroborated each other, and that gave probable cause. Besides, the good faith exception applies, too. United States v. Avalo, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157294 (N.D. Ga. Oct. 5, 2016), adopted, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157182 (N.D. Ga. Nov. 10, 2016).*

Posted in Dog sniff, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on ID: Officer writing ticket providing backup to drug dog abandoned traffic ticket making it a criminal investigation; suppressed

CA6: Rule 41(g) motion for return of property doesn’t lie in federal court when state officers seized, even in a federal prosecution

Rule 41(g) motion for return of property requires that officers of the federal government have seized it. Where state and local authorities seized the property, a 41(g) motion doesn’t lie in federal court. United States v. Price, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 20396 (6th Cir. Nov. 14, 2016). See also W.D.N.Y.: When a state search warrant is used in federal court, state officers retain the evidence pending trial posted 11/18.

Defendant was stopped for not signaling a turn on his motorcycle. He claimed he did, but the trial court credited the officer’s testimony. Issuing the ticket for the stop would normally take 12-15 minutes, and a drug dog was called for. Defendant claimed the officer slow walked the ticketing process to avoid Rodriguez, but the court finds defendant’s reaching back toward something on the back of his bike caused delay by a putdown for officer safety that made the length of the delay reasonable. State v. Matheney, 2016-Ohio-7690, 2016 Ohio App. LEXIS 4557 (2d Dist. Nov. 10, 2016).

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on CA6: Rule 41(g) motion for return of property doesn’t lie in federal court when state officers seized, even in a federal prosecution

N.D.Ga.: Landlord had apparent authority to consent because of writ of possession

Defendant’s landlord had a writ of possession from a state court and had evicted him from the premises. He called the police and the police saw the writ of possession, and they had no reason to question it. The court does not even have to consider whether state law on service of the writ of possession was valid. Instead, the court just resolves this under the rubric of apparent authority under the Fourth Amendment finding that the landlord had apparent authority. United States v. Russell, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156325 (N.D.Ga. Oct. 3, 2016), adopted, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156028 (N.D. Ga. Nov. 10, 2016):
Continue reading →

Posted in Apparent authority | Comments Off on N.D.Ga.: Landlord had apparent authority to consent because of writ of possession

MD: Dog sniff two months earlier didn’t justify search incident on arrest

Defendant’s car was subjected to a drug dog sniff in March 2014 finding drugs, but he wasn’t arrested. Arrest warrants were issued later, and two months later he was arrested. A search incident for drugs wasn’t valid two months later, and that search produced heroin on defendant’s person. The good faith exception also doesn’t apply. Jones v. State, 2016 Md. App. LEXIS 222 (Nov. 9, 2016).

“After careful review of the supporting affidavit at issue, the Court disagrees with Defendant. While the affidavit in the case presently before the Court may not be the model of completeness, when viewed in light of the totality of the circumstances and drawing reasonably factual inferences in the present context of this case, it does provide sufficient facts to support a finding of probable cause by the issuing judge.” United States v. Johnson, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156518 (D.Minn. Oct. 25, 2016),* adopted, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156654 (D. Minn. Nov. 9, 2016).*

Posted in Dog sniff, Probable cause | Comments Off on MD: Dog sniff two months earlier didn’t justify search incident on arrest

N.D.Cal.: Cursory look at cell phone that revealed nothing doesn’t preclude PC for SW

A cursory search of a codefendant’s phone produced nothing and a cursory look at defendant’s phone didn’t either. That does not, however, preclude a finding of probable cause to believe that there was evidence on the phone for a search warrant. United States v. Petrov, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156430 (N.D.Cal. Nov. 9, 2016):
Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Probable cause | Comments Off on N.D.Cal.: Cursory look at cell phone that revealed nothing doesn’t preclude PC for SW

NLJ: Ninth Circuit Considers Limits to DEA Access to Oregon Prescription Drug Monitoring Program

NLJ: Ninth Circuit Considers Limits to DEA Access to Oregon Prescription Drug Monitoring Program:

On November 7, 2016, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit heard arguments in Oregon Prescription Drug Monitoring Program v. United States DEA, No. 14-35402 (9th Cir. 2016). Here, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) sought to overturn a ruling that the DEA’s use of administrative subpoenas to access records from the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) violates the Fourth Amendment, resulting in potentially wide-ranging implications.

Posted in Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on NLJ: Ninth Circuit Considers Limits to DEA Access to Oregon Prescription Drug Monitoring Program

NJ: Protective sweep requires at least some slight justification another person may be present; here, there was none

A woman called police as a victim of domestic violence. When they arrived, she was in her car, and she gave an address of where her assailant was but no name. They go to that address and enter, and then conduct a protective sweep seeing contraband in plain view. When they entered they still didn’t have the name of the assailant. Moreover, nothing indicated to the officers that there was another person even present to justify a protective sweep. State v. Bryant, 2016 N.J. LEXIS 1175 (Nov. 10, 2016).

Merely stating something as a Fourth Amendment issue and then briefing it aren’t the same. Giving no authority and no argument is essentially a waiver of the argument. Koehly v. Levi, 2016 ND 202, 2016 N.D. LEXIS 207 (Nov. 9, 2016).

Posted in Motion to suppress, Protective sweep | Comments Off on NJ: Protective sweep requires at least some slight justification another person may be present; here, there was none