NYTimes: Crime Dips in New York as Misdemeanor Arrests Rise, Report Says by J. David Goodmanoct:
Two decades ago, New Yorkers were more likely to be arrested in the middle of Manhattan for a misdemeanor than in any other neighborhood. Then, as crime fell, minor arrests in the heart of the city went down too.
A threatened suicide is an exigent circumstance for an entry, following other circuits. Rice v. Reliastar Life Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20581 (5th Cir. October 27, 2014):
The Rice Plaintiffs argue that the exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement does not apply in this case. They point out that Arnold entered Rice’s home before Rice ever fired his gun, and so, at the time Arnold entered, no exigencies excused his warrantless entry. The Rice Plaintiffs also argue that Arnold violated departmental regulations in entering Rice’s home and that Arnold and the other deputies should have established a perimeter and waited for a special response team before engaging with Rice.
This is not the first time we have encountered a tragic factual scenario like the one present here: a police officer, in an attempt to aid a potentially suicidal individual, entered without a warrant and killed the person the officer was trying to help. Continue reading
CBP x-rayed bags of passengers flying between St. John’s and St. Thomas VI during Carnival between 7 am and 5 pm. A gun was found in defendant’s carry-on bag. It was not a flight involving Customs, as flights from and to the U.S. mainland are. The purpose of the x-raying was to indict firearms coming to Carnival. The search was unreasonable and violated the Fourth Amendment. Like the intermediate border checkpoint rejected by SCOTUS in Torres, this search cannot be justified merely by crime control. The CBP officers had to know, or at least should have known, that the search was illegal, and suppression is the proper remedy. United States v. Rivera, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151950 (D. V.I. October 23, 2014):
Continue reading
A suspicionless supervised release search condition was not properly justified by the district court, and it’s reversed. United States v. Hinds, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20651 (7th Cir. October 27, 2014):
The search and seizure condition, special condition five, can be disposed of quickly. At oral argument, the government conceded that this invasive condition is no different from the one struck down in Farmer. See 755 F.3d at 854 (vacating a search condition that required “no suspicion, reasonable or otherwise,” to justify a search). The government also conceded the special condition deserved to be vacated and remanded.
Continue reading
Atlantic: California Can’t Police Its Own Cops Stealing Nude Photos of Women by Conor Friedersdorf:
Local authorities are investigating a highway-patrol scandal, but their perverse incentives mean federal authorities need to step in.
The story the court documents tell is alarming.
After an automobile crash, a young woman suspected of drunk driving was getting checked out for injuries. A California Highway Patrol officer, five-year veteran Sean Harrington, had her cell phone. He found a photo of her in a bikini. So he allegedly sent the image to his own phone, and then, though already guilty of criminal conduct, he forwarded the image to another California Highway Patrol officer. “Taken from the phone of my 10-15x while she’s in X-rays,” he texted. “Enjoy buddy!!!”
Continue reading
WaPo: Lanier addresses concerns over police stops; says new way needed to fight drugs by Peter Hermann:
Addressing complaints that officers unfairly detain people, D.C. Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier said Monday she understands that traffic stops and other routine interactions can become “pressure points” causing rifts between residents and law enforcement.
NYTimes: Report Reveals Wider Tracking of Mail in U.S. by Ron Nixon:
WASHINGTON — In a rare public accounting of its mass surveillance program, the United States Postal Service reported that it approved nearly 50,000 requests last year from law enforcement agencies and its own internal inspection unit to secretly monitor the mail of Americans for use in criminal and national security investigations.
The number of requests, contained in a 2014 audit of the surveillance program by the Postal Service’s inspector general, shows that the surveillance program is more extensive than previously disclosed and that oversight protecting Americans from potential abuses is lax.
Defendant entered a county courthouse and emptied his pockets for the metal detector. He left an aspirin bottle in the tray which the officer shook. He concluded it contained something other than aspirin. Defendant wasn’t detained but the bottle was. Cocaine was found and he was later arrested. The search of the aspirin bottle was reasonable as an area entry search to be sure nothing noxious or a weapon was coming in. This courthouse had three chemical weapons scares in the past, and there was a sign warning of searches of belongings. Commonwealth v. Gillespie, 2014 PA Super 245, 2014 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3941 (October 27, 2014).
The district court denied the motion to suppress before trial, and a motion for new trial on the same grounds is denied for the same reason. United States v. Myers, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151714 (S.D. Miss. October 27, 2014).*
A resident on a cul-de-sac called the police because a car that seemingly didn’t belong was driving around a few times. The police were called and stopped the car. Defendant was arrested for DUI. The stop lacked an objective basis because there was nothing to show that the occupant of the vehicle did anything wrong. It was late, and it was suspicious, but there wasn’t any fact that supported that criminal activity was afoot. State v. Willis, M2014-00252-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. October 27, 2014).*
Defendant and his wife had separated, and she needed information off a computer hard drive for tax purposes. She found apparent child pornography and told her divorce lawyer who took possession then called the police. The police search didn’t exceed the private search except with a search warrant. United States v. Kaszynski, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151687 (M.D. Fla. September 25, 2014).*
Defendant fled rather than talk to the police, and he discarded a gun in flight. That was abandonment. He was not seized he fled. United States v. Suttles, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151733 (E.D. Tenn. September 16, 2014).*
Techdirt: Feds Want To Keep A Big Part Of Their Argument Against Lawsuit Over Internet Spying A Total Secret by Mike Masnick:
from the because-nsa dept
The big Jewel v. NSA case is still moving forward. This is the pre-Snowden lawsuit against the NSA over its tapping of fiber optic cables. We now understand that this was part of what the NSA refers to as “upstream collection” under Section 706 of the FISA Amendments Act, but most of us recognize it for what it really is: and that’s snooping on tons of internet backbone traffic in the hopes of finding something interesting. This broad “upstream” collection is immensely problematic, and the Justice Department has bent over backwards time and time again trying to kill the case — without success so far. The EFF has recently filed its latest reply brief (pdf) in support of its motion for a partial summary judgment, responding to the government’s (not surprising) opposition (pdf). The EFF has a clear summary of its arguments on its blog, which is worth reading.
The Hill: New phones will help criminals, says Asst. AG by Cory Bennett:
New technology from Apple, Google will be used “to evade law enforcement.”
Isn’t that what privacy used to be for?
Defendant challenged the government reading the magnetic strips on the back of allegedly counterfeit credit cards; not the seizure of the cards in the first place. The court finds that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in the magnetic strips because they are intended to be read when used. Moreover, it is analogous to the drug testing of seized drugs approved in Jacobsen. United States v. De L’Isle, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151078 (D. Neb. October 24, 2014):
To begin with, a scan of magnetically-coded information on a credit or debit card does not involve a physical intrusion into a constitutionally-protected area. “[R]eading and displaying virtual data encoded on a track does not involve any physical invasion or penetration of space.” Alabi, 943 F. Supp. 2d at 1265. Nor, when the card is already in the physical possession of the person scanning it, is the magnetic strip a constitutionally-protected area.
Continue reading
NYTimes Editorial: No Progress on Marijuana Arrests:
The de Blasio administration needs to really do something about the targeting of young black and Latino men.
Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel: Armored vehicle helps collect civil judgment in small town by Bruce Vielmetti:
When officials in the tiny Town of Stettin in Marathon County went to collect a civil judgment from 75-year-old Roger Hoeppner this month, they sent 24 armed officers.
And an armored military vehicle.
Among other issues, the recent unrest in Ferguson, Mo., focused attention on the growing militarization of local law enforcement, particularly the use by even very small police departments of surplus armored military vehicles.
Marathon County sheriff’s officials aren’t apologizing for their tactics. Sheriff’s Capt. Greg Bean said officials expected to have to seize and remove tractors and wooden pallets to pay the judgment — hence the cadre of deputies. He also said what while Hoeppner was never considered dangerous, he was known to be argumentative.
The difference between men and boys is the cost and size of their toys.
NYTimes: Law Lets I.R.S. Seize Accounts on Suspicion, No Crime Required by Shaila Dewan:
For almost 40 years, Carole Hinders has dished out Mexican specialties at her modest cash-only restaurant. For just as long, she deposited the earnings at a small bank branch a block away – until last year, when two tax agents knocked on her door and informed her that they had seized her checking account, almost $33,000. The Internal Revenue Service agents did not accuse Ms. Hinders of money laundering or cheating on her taxes – in fact, she has not been charged with any crime. Instead, the money was seized solely because she had deposited less than $10,000 at a time, which they viewed as an attempt to avoid triggering a required government report.
…
On Thursday, in response to questions from The New York Times, the I.R.S. announced that it would curtail the practice, focusing instead on cases where the money is believed to have been acquired illegally or seizure is deemed justified by “exceptional circumstances.”
In a child abuse investigation on an Indian reservation, the government showed probable cause to believe that information relevant to the investigation would be found on defendant’s cell phone. A search warrant for Verizon for text messages and telephone calls for a five day period surrounding the date of the alleged abuse was issued. The next day, another warrant issued for the cell phone itself looking for that information and pictures. Nexus, a basis to believe the information would be found on the phone, was shown. United States v. Duncan, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151162 (D. Minn. October 7, 2014):
Continue reading
