Reason: The FBI Seized This Woman’s Life Savings—Without Telling Her Why

Reason: The FBI Seized This Woman’s Life Savings—Without Telling Her Why by Billy Binion (“Linda Martin’s lawsuit alleges that the agency violated her right to due process when it took her $40,200 and sent her a notice failing to articulate the reason.”)

Posted in Forfeiture | Comments Off on Reason: The FBI Seized This Woman’s Life Savings—Without Telling Her Why

MI: Nighttime entry onto curtilage was reasonable because officers were responding to a dangerous situation

Officers approached defendant’s house for a knock-and-talk at 10:43 pm. There is no implied license to enter the curtilage at that time, but here it was because officers were responding to a report of a dangerous situation, and that made it reasonable. People v. ASK, 2025 Mich. App. LEXIS 2161 (Mar. 19, 2025) (unpublished):

Continue reading →
Posted in Curtilage, Knock and talk, Nighttime search | Comments Off on MI: Nighttime entry onto curtilage was reasonable because officers were responding to a dangerous situation

D.Neb.: Officer asking same question three different ways didn’t unreasonably prolong the stop

Asking the same question of defendant a different way three times while doing the traffic citation did not unreasonably prolong the stop. The officer said he was not trying to be “robotic” sounding. United States v. Burns, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50996 (D. Neb. Mar. 20, 2025).

CI’s controlled buy from plaintiff’s home supported probable cause for his arrest, and this § 1983 case was properly disposed of on summary judgment, despite the fact he spent 19 months in jail and the criminal case was dismissed. His Franks claim based on speculation of a conspiracy to frame him fails. Rainey v. Lewis, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6500 (7th Cir. Mar. 20, 2025).*

Patdown producing cash after finding drugs during traffic stop was reasonable as search incident. Clemons v. State, 2025 Iowa App. LEXIS 244 (Mar. 19, 2025).*

The affidavit for warrant established the CI’s reliability and basis of knowledge. State v. Barnes, 2025 Iowa App. LEXIS 248 (Mar. 19, 2025).*

Posted in Informant hearsay, Probable cause, Reasonableness, Search incident | Comments Off on D.Neb.: Officer asking same question three different ways didn’t unreasonably prolong the stop

PA: Entry of curtilage to inquire of a chop shop in operation was reasonable

Officers saw defendant “dissecting a motor vehicle in his driveway,” i.e., running a chop shop, which they already suspected him of. They could enter the curtilage to inquire. Commonwealth v. Ewida, 2025 PA Super 67, 2025 Pa. Super. LEXIS 128 (Mar. 20, 2025).

There is a presumption that there was probable cause for a search warrant, and defendant doesn’t show this one was lacking. Moreover, “The defendant has failed to provide any evidence to indicate, let alone establish, that the officers did not act in good faith in obtaining the search warrants of March 26 and April 5, 2024 and executing them.” United States v. Bailey, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50460 (W.D.N.Y. Feb. 5, 2025).*

Texas consent must be by clear and convincing evidence, and this wasn’t. “Despite the fact that the investigative detention had concluded without finding any weapons or contraband, the two investigating officers did not move. They were both within arm’s reach, if not closer, of appellant, restraining his movement and preventing him from turning around before he was asked to consent to a search of his person. They forced his hands on the hood of the vehicle. The situation, like that in Carmouche, would not have led a reasonable person to conclude the search was optional.” Madas v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 1863 (Tex. App. – Houston (14th Dist.) Mar. 20, 2025).*

Posted in Consent, Curtilage, Probable cause | Comments Off on PA: Entry of curtilage to inquire of a chop shop in operation was reasonable

PA: PO search of parolee’s visitor required RS which was lacking

Under a parole search of one Scott in his home, the PO had authority to frisk the visitor defendant if he had safety concerns or reasonable suspicion, and here they did not. Commonwealth v. Gibson, 2025 PA Super 65, 2025 Pa. Super. LEXIS 127 (Mar. 19, 2025).

Defendant’s claim the stop was prolonged without reasonable suspicion fails. There was a warrant for his arrest. United States v. Rainey, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6452 (6th Cir. Mar. 19, 2025).*

As to a Franks claim: “As the Magistrate Judge concluded, Petitfrere’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel fails because he has not alleged any facts suggesting that his attorney’s performance was deficient nor shown that he was prejudiced by such performance.” United States v. Petitfrere, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49841 (E.D. Ky. Mar. 19, 2025).*

A threat to arrest for trespass doesn’t state a Fourth Amendment claim. Kelly v. Gallagher, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49905 (D. Ariz. Mar. 18, 2025).*

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Franks doctrine, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on PA: PO search of parolee’s visitor required RS which was lacking

The Record: The NYPD is sending more drones to 911 calls, but privacy advocates don’t like the view

The Record: The NYPD is sending more drones to 911 calls, but privacy advocates don’t like the view by Suzanne Smalley (“City officials say the so-called drones as first responders (DFR) program is making New York safer, but civil liberties and privacy advocates argue that police have not been transparent about operations that allow law enforcement sweeping surveillance capabilities that could easily be abused … Law enforcement agencies deploying DFRs are taking advantage of a lack of legal precedent, said Sidney Thaxter, a senior litigator at the Fourth Amendment Center at the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. While there is case law saying that people have no reasonable right to privacy in their backyard when being observed by a helicopter, courts have not yet ruled on aerial privacy rights under drones, he said. Drones are far smaller, quieter and less noticeable than helicopters, making the court rulings outdated, Thaxter said.”)

Posted in Drones | Comments Off on The Record: The NYPD is sending more drones to 911 calls, but privacy advocates don’t like the view

The Marshall Project: Mississippi’s No-Knock Raids Have Led to Death and Injury. Dozens of Warrants Lacked Clear Justification.

The Marshall Project: Mississippi’s No-Knock Raids Have Led to Death and Injury. Dozens of Warrants Lacked Clear Justification. (“During a 2015 no-knock drug raid in Mississippi’s rural northeast corner, sheriff’s deputies shot and killed 57-year-old Ricky Keeton after he came to the door with an air pistol as SWAT team members forced their way into his trailer home at 1 a.m. Keeton’s death received little public attention at the time. Keeton’s three daughters sued, arguing that Monroe County deputies had no constitutional authority that night to burst into their father’s home with a battering ram and pry bar without first knocking and identifying themselves … Since the Keeton killing in 2015, judges in six courts across the state have approved at least 62 no-knock search warrants that failed to show that they met basic constitutional standards, an investigation by The Marshall Project–Jackson and the Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal found.”)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on The Marshall Project: Mississippi’s No-Knock Raids Have Led to Death and Injury. Dozens of Warrants Lacked Clear Justification.

Reason: Warrantless Home Searches Under the Alien Enemies Act?

Reason: The Volokh Conspiracy: Warrantless Home Searches Under the Alien Enemies Act? by Orin S. Kerr:

Continue reading →
Posted in Immigration arrests | Comments Off on Reason: Warrantless Home Searches Under the Alien Enemies Act?

OR: Following def in an unmarked police car is not a seizure, and he voluntarily stopped

Following defendant in an unmarked car was not a seizure. Defendant ultimately voluntarily stopped and talked to the officer. State v. Serini, 2025 Ore. App. LEXIS 446 (Mar. 19, 2025).*

When defendant was placed in the patrol car, the officer had reasonable suspicion that he was under the influence. Martinez-Orta v. State, 2025 Ind. App. LEXIS 78 (Mar. 18, 2025).*

The person handing over a bag of ammunition had apparent authority to do so, and the contents of the bag were immediately apparently. United States v. Smith, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6399 (4th Cir. Mar. 19, 2025).*

To the extent the sufficiency of evidence argument could be construed to be a suppression of evidence argument, it was waived by failing to present it below. Henry v. State, 2025 Ark. App. 174 (Mar. 19, 2025).*

Posted in Apparent authority, Plain view, feel, smell, Reasonable suspicion, Seizure, Waiver | Comments Off on OR: Following def in an unmarked police car is not a seizure, and he voluntarily stopped

AK: Public court filings violate no REP

“Herndon’s argument that her rights under the Fourth Amendment were violated when the superior court ‘commingled [her] private filings making it public’ is without merit. Herndon has no reasonable expectation of privacy in information that she voluntarily submitted to the government.” In re A Change of Name for Herndon, 2025 Alas. LEXIS 42 (Mar. 19, 2025).*

The officer was looking for a red Honda Civic and saw defendant in one as it passed him near the scene of the alleged crime. There was reasonable suspicion for the stop. “Looking at the totality of the circumstances here–the ‘whole picture’–if Richey was a ‘close question’ on reasonable suspicion, this case lands much closer to a slam dunk.” State v. Solom, 2025 Wisc. App. LEXIS 262 (Mar. 19, 2025).*

There are questions of fact as to both the justification for the stop and the use of force here. Summary judgment denied. Q.M. v. Cty. of L.A., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49466 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2025).*

2254 successor petition for a later probation search is barred. In re Barringer, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6358 (11th Cir. Mar. 18, 2025).*

Posted in Consent, Issue preclusion, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on AK: Public court filings violate no REP

GA: Dog sniff of car while citation being filled out did not extend stop; suppression reversed

While the stopping officer was filling out the citation, a second officer arrived. The dog sniff occurred while the citation was still being filled out, so it didn’t extend the stop. Grant of motion to suppress reversed. State v. Dean, 2025 Ga. App. LEXIS 143 (Mar. 19, 2025).

“Here, arresting officers relied on a series of facts connecting the Santander and Citibank Robberies to Mr. Brito. That some of those facts might have been innocuous when considered in isolation does not disturb this Court’s conclusion that the same facts, when considered together, established probable cause that Mr. Brito committed the Santander and Citibank Robberies, and thus established probable cause arrest Mr. Brito on November 30, 2023.” United States v. Brito, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49309 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2025).*

Defendant claims he innocently knocked on a door, but the occupant thought it was beating on the door and a burglary was about to happen and she called the police. There was reasonable suspicion when the police showed up and he was the only person there. “Even if Defendant was merely knocking on Wilson’s door as he contends, officers do not have to eliminate all innocent behaviors for there to be reasonable suspicion. … Given the totality of the circumstances, the Court finds that officers had reasonable suspicion to believe a crime was occurring and that Defendant was the person committing the crime.” United States v. Williams, No. 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49131 (E.D. Tenn. Mar. 18, 2025).*

Posted in Dog sniff, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on GA: Dog sniff of car while citation being filled out did not extend stop; suppression reversed

D.P.R.: Officers’ reliance on differing versions of weapons law was objectively reasonable

The Spanish and English versions of a section of the Puerto Rico Weapons Law differ with “and” and “or” and reliance on whichever is objectively reasonable under Heien. United States v. Rosa-Ufred, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49334 (D.P.R. Mar. 14, 2025):

Continue reading →
Posted in Reasonableness | Comments Off on D.P.R.: Officers’ reliance on differing versions of weapons law was objectively reasonable

CA10: Siccing police dog on sleeping man wasn’t subject to QI

Siccing a police dog on a sleeping man not subject to qualified immunity. Luethje v. Kyle, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6385 (10th Cir. Mar. 19, 2025).

The CI’s information on a video showed his basis of knowledge and provided probable cause. State v. Hawkins, 2025 Ohio App. LEXIS 868 (5th Dist. Mar. 17, 2025).*

Warrantless arrest of a parole violator without a warrant doesn’t state a Fourth Amendment claim. Hobbs v. Mich. Parole Bd., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48768 (W.D. Mich. Mar. 18, 2025).*

The delay in getting a search warrant here was reasonable and justified by other investigative activities in this case, including a criminal complaint and a grand jury presentation. United States v. Witherspoon, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49040 (E.D. Ky. Jan. 29, 2025).*

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Informant hearsay, Probation / Parole search, Qualified immunity, Staleness | Comments Off on CA10: Siccing police dog on sleeping man wasn’t subject to QI

N.D.Ind.: There was PC for stop, and pretext claim was speculative and didn’t merit hearing

Defendant’s claim that the officer was acting pretextually in stopping him is speculative at best. “Mr. Ellis also argues that the traffic stop was pretextual. However, an officer’s ‘actual motivations’ and ‘[s]ubjective intentions play no role in ordinary, probable-cause Fourth Amendment analysis.’ Whren, 517 U.S. at 813. Therefore, even if the traffic stop was pretextual, it does not alter the Court’s conclusion that Lt. Bartlett had probable cause to initiate the traffic stop.” One doesn’t automatically get a hearing to flesh out speculation. As for prolonging the stop, it was reasonable based on the return on insurance information which defendant’s wasn’t carrying. United States v. Ellis, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48991 (N.D. Ind. Mar. 18, 2025).*

“Upon learning that Mr. Binion’s license was suspended, the officers had probable cause to arrest him for driving with a suspended license. The officers then searched Mr. Binion, which the officers were permitted to do under the search incident to arrest exception to the warrant requirement. See Maryland v. King, 569 U.S. 435, 449 (2013). When the officers recovered suspected narcotics and money from Mr. Binion’s pockets, the officers then had probable cause to believe that Mr. Binion committed a crime involving controlled substances. Mr. Binion’s arrest was therefore lawful.” Then the vehicle search was permitted, too. United States v. Binion, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48999 (N.D. Ind. Mar. 18, 2025).*

Posted in Pretext, Search incident | Comments Off on N.D.Ind.: There was PC for stop, and pretext claim was speculative and didn’t merit hearing

N.D.Miss.: Summers didn’t support transporting person to jail whose house was being searched

Plaintiff’s house was searched on a warrant. There was no probable cause as to him at the time. It was unreasonable under Summers to transport him in handcuffs to the jail to be questioned for five hours and then released. Holliday v. Monroe Cty., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49020 (N.D. Miss. Mar. 18, 2025):

Continue reading →
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on N.D.Miss.: Summers didn’t support transporting person to jail whose house was being searched

E.D.Mich.: Ptf’s jail strip search on camera after contact visit was reasonable

Plaintiff’s jail strip search after a contact visit was reasonable, and the fact it was on camera doesn’t make it unreasonable. Parker v. Robert J. White Mich. Dep’t of Corr., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48519 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 27, 2025):

Continue reading →
Posted in Prison and jail searches, Strip search | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Ptf’s jail strip search on camera after contact visit was reasonable

CA9: No QI for nearly destroying a house in a search for a person to arrest

Summary judgment and qualified immunity were properly denied where officers searching for someone other than the plaintiff in plaintiff’s house [apparently] gratuitously nearly destroyed it, breaking all windows, toilets, leaving water running in the house, appliances, furniture, and a car outside. Denby v. Engstrom, No. 23-15658, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6271 (9th Cir. Mar. 18, 2025):

Continue reading →
Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Excessive force, Scope of search, Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA9: No QI for nearly destroying a house in a search for a person to arrest

ARS Technica: Everything you say to your Echo will be sent to Amazon starting on March 28

ARS Technica: Everything you say to your Echo will be sent to Amazon starting on March 28 by Scharon Harding:

Continue reading →
Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on ARS Technica: Everything you say to your Echo will be sent to Amazon starting on March 28

D.Minn.: SW’s failure to include motel name, address, and room number failed particularity

The search warrant was ostensibly for a particular Motel 6 and room number, but the warrant completely omitted reference to the place to be searched. United States v. Brown, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47675 (D. Minn. Mar. 13, 2025).

When witnesses to a shooting said that an SUV contained either suspects in the shooting or witnesses to it, there was reasonable suspicion to stop it. As for search of a cell phone, the warrant authorized search and seizure of “any and all” information and things on it, and defendant argued it was a general warrant. However, Officer “Ebert testified that he simply used standard department language that had been approved on many previous occasions.” The good faith exception applied. “We need not consider, and take no position on whether the district court correctly concluded that the cell phone warrant ‘was insufficiently particular and unconstitutionally overbroad.’” United States v. Williams, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6230 (8th Cir. Mar. 18, 2025).

The critical six seconds of video of this shooting supports the officer’s version and not plaintiff’s so qualified immunity applies. Denk v. Miller, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6180 (9th Cir. Mar. 17, 2025).*

There was probable cause for the warrant for defendant’s BAC. People v. Coble, 2025 Mich. App. LEXIS 2061 (Mar. 17, 2025).*

Posted in Good faith exception, Particularity, Probable cause, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on D.Minn.: SW’s failure to include motel name, address, and room number failed particularity

PA: For crime of obstructing a search, def didn’t have to see SW to know there was one when he was told

Defendant’s conviction for obstructing a search is affirmed. He was not entitled to a jury instruction that he had to have seen or read the warrant first where it was not disputed that he knew there was a warrant. Commonwealth v. Sow, 2025 PA Super 63 (Mar. 17, 2025).

The delay in procuring a warrant for electronic data the government had was justified. The investigation progressed as the officers learned more and more justifying the warrant. United States v. Witherspoon, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47677 (E.D. Ky. Mar. 17, 2025).*

An ineffective assistance of counsel claim requires a valid Fourth Amendment claim, and here there isn’t one. “In arguing that his counsel should have filed a motion to suppress, Johnson does not cite any statutory or constitutional right, nor any rule of evidence, that was violated by the introduction of the guns. Instead, Johnson points to the evidence and asks the Court to find the basis for a potential motion to suppress.” It doesn’t work that way. United States v. Witherspoon, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47677 (E.D. Ky. Mar. 17, 2025).*

Posted in Computer and cloud searches, Ineffective assistance, Staleness, Warrant execution | Comments Off on PA: For crime of obstructing a search, def didn’t have to see SW to know there was one when he was told