NY Times: F.B.I. Director Hints at Action as Cellphone Data Is Locked by David E. Sanger and Matt Apuzzo:
The director of the F.B.I., James B. Comey, said on Thursday that the “post-Snowden pendulum” that has driven Apple and Google to offer fully encrypted cellphones had “gone too far.”
The motion to suppress a cell phone search under the automobile exception was filed and heard in November before Riley, and defendant was convicted. Before sentencing, Riley came down, and the court asked for briefs. The court concludes the search of the cell phone was harmless on the record as a whole, comparing what was found to the rest of the proof. United States v. Figueroa, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146722 (S.D. N.Y. October 1, 2014).*
The state law requirement of warnings before a knock and talk don’t apply to arrest warrants. State v. Westvang, 2014 Wash. App. LEXIS 2452 (October 10, 2014).*
Police entered an apartment in a homicide investigation with an arrest warrant. On the totality, they had a reasonable belief that exigent circumstances justified their entry into the nearby bedroom to protect their own safety and the safety of the occupants of the apartment. The suspect in the arrest warrant had committed a homicide within the past two days, the murder weapon had not been found, the police had traced to the address that they had entered a cell phone that a witness had told them was being used by the suspect, the landlord of the building indicated that there was a man who matched the suspect’s description in the third floor apartment at that address, and the tenant allowed the officers into the apartment and indicated that there were two men in the nearby bedroom who matched the description. State v. Kendrick, 2014 Conn. LEXIS 310 (October 21, 2014)* (dissent; dissent).
Although defendant was not an authorized driver of the rental car stopped by police for a traffic violation, defendant had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the gift-wrapped packages in that car, which she continually asserted were hers and were being taken to her daughter, and thus, defendant had standing to challenge the trooper’s search of those packages. People v. Sotelo, 2014 CO 74, 2014 Colo. LEXIS 876 (October 14, 2014).
This was an excessive force case tried to the court without a jury. Based on the conflicting testimony, the court can’t say that the defense verdict was unsupported. Williams v. Dohm, 2014 La. App. LEXIS 2475 (La.App. 1 Cir. October 14, 2014).*
Defendant’s search and other claims can’t be brought as a successive petition where he was already denied a COA. United States v. Banks, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 19726 (3d Cir. October 15, 2014).*
Defendant loaned his tool bag to a friend who found a flash drive in the bag, and, because of the way it was hidden, he was curious and looked at it finding probable child pornography. Then he called a woman that defendant dated and let her look, and she found pictures that were taken when they were together. Then they gave the flash drive to the police. The police search did not exceed the private search, and it was not unreasonable. State v. Manning, 2014 Iowa App. LEXIS 1007 (October 15, 2014).
Defendant’s IAC claim wasn’t properly before the court on direct appeal, so he can raise it post-conviction. State v. Avery, 2014 Iowa App. LEXIS 1022 (October 15, 2014).*
The statute of limitations for an illegal search starts at the time of the search, not when the plaintiff thinks that it’s a viable claim. Estate of Lagano v. Bergen County Prosecutor’s Office, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 19722 (3d Cir. October 15, 2014).
Reason: How Federal Agents Illegally Force Twitter, Google, and Banks to Turn Over Private Customer Data Without a Proper Warrant by Andrew Napolitano:
Private companies are fighting the federal government in court over the Patriot Act’s “National Security Letters,” which violate the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution.
Isn’t it ironic that a FoxNews commentator is writing a post for Reason?
Real-time cell site location information is protected under Fourth Amendment. Tracey v. State, 2014 Fla. LEXIS 3072 (October 16, 2014). This is a fascinating opinion, and it’s the most sensitive review of the issue yet:
Continue reading
A search warrant was issued for defendant’s house, and an obvious scrivener’s error at the time the warrant was issued was entered into the space providing for the latest time when the warrant should be executed. That error could be overlooked where the warrant was executed within three hours of issuance. Also, collective knowledge supported defendant’s stop. United States v. McKay, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145985 (W.D. Pa. October 14, 2014).
2255 petitioner’s search and seizure claim was so vague court couldn’t identify it. “Finally, it is not clear which search or seizure Oakgrove is referring to when he indicates that his conviction was obtained through an unconstitutional search and seizure. Without additional information, the Court is unable to analyze the merits of Oakgrove’s claim, and will deny his petition on this ground.” United States v. Oakgrove, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146206 (D. Minn. October 14, 2014).*
The search warrant was issued with probable cause, and, even if not, it was close enough that the good faith exception applied. United States v. Shelton, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146063 (D. Minn. October 14, 2014),* R&R 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146367 (D. Minn. August 28, 2014).*
NLJ: Oyez Project Dives Deep Into the Fourth Amendment by Marcia Coyle:
Justice Elena Kagan has called the Fourth Amendment “a growth industry” for the the U.S. Supreme Court. Now the Oyez Project, long a purveyor of high court information, has taken a “deep dive” into how the Roberts Court has managed that “industry.”
“Shifting Scales: How the Roberts Court Is Interpreting The Fourth Amendment” is a visually smart, personalized trip through the court’s Fourth Amendment jurisprudence and how the justices balance privacy and law-enforcement interests.
. . .
The “Shifting Scales” can be found at: http://projects.oyez.org/shifting-scales.
Cell site location information was obtained by court order for defendants’ cell phones to connect them to robberies. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in the location data stored by another and the Stored Communications Act was complied with. United States v. Rogers, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145980 (N.D. Ill. October 9, 2014):
Continue reading
Houston Chronicle: Lawsuit over ‘Texas Takedown’ proceeds despite defendants’ request to dismiss by Carole Christian:
A Montgomery County woman who sued county officials over a home narcotics search that was filmed for reality TV can continue with part of the suit, a federal judge has ruled.
The Atlantic: Zap! Should the State Keep Shocking Citizens to Enforce Minor Laws? by Conors Friedersdorf:
A man shocked into submission after walking his dog off leash sues, and wins long overdue limits on Taser-happy law enforcement.
Continue reading
WSJ: Police Stops Erode Support From New York Residents [Well, duh] by Pervaiz Shallwani:
A rare, large-scale police department survey of New York City residents found that the more times a person is stopped by an officer, their favorable view of local law-enforcement authorities plummets.
NLJ: Justice Dept. Phone Data Memo to Remain Secret:
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to step into a dispute over public access to a secret U.S. Department of Justice memo about the government’s ability to acquire phone data without a court order.
NYLJ: Circuit Denies Request for New Stop-and-Frisk Panel by Mark Hamblett:
Over the objection of plaintiffs’ lawyers in New York City’s stop-and-frisk litigation, circuit judges Jose Cabranes, Barrington Parker and John Walker-the panel who had blocked Southern District Judge Shira Scheindlin’s liability and remedial rulings last year-will hear arguments on Wednesday.
A computer tech was hired to transfer information from an old hard drive to a new computer in 2007, and he stumbled upon child pornography and called the FBI. They met, and he brought the hard drive. Defendant’s email address matched persons who had downloaded from a CP website the FBI had seized information from in 2005: illegal.CP. A search warrant was obtained for the hard drive and it was seized, but it wasn’t searched until 2010. First, the initial search was a private search, up to the point that the government told him to keep it then he became a government actor in retaining it. Second, retaining the hard drive was justified under the circumstances. Defendant was a lawyer, and if he got wind of what the government was doing, destruction of the evidence was likely, so the exigent circumstances exception applied. The 13 month delay in getting a warrant to search the hard drive was unreasonable. United States v. Jarman, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146202 (M.D. La. October 14, 2014):
Continue reading
The Root: Ohio Police Change Story and Arrest Couple During Traffic Stop by Stephen A. Crockett Jr.:
A cellphone video of a police stop has gone viral, with a police officer shown telling a couple during a routine traffic stop that he will send their 2-week-old baby to child protective services if they don’t get out of the car.
Politico: Snail mail snooping safeguards not followed by Josh Gerstein:
Cutting-edge data-gathering techniques may have grabbed the spotlight lately, but it turns out the government has been playing fast and loose with a more old-school surveillance method: snail-mail snooping.
The U.S. Postal Service failed to observe key safeguards on a mail surveillance program with a history of civil liberties abuses, according to a new internal watchdog report that USPS managers tried to keep secret, citing security concerns.
USPS Audit Report: Postal Inspection Service Mail Covers Program:
Continue reading
WHO13: Ankeny Cop Tries To Search Car Because ‘Everybody that Plays Frisbee Golf Smokes Weed’ by Aaron Brilbeck:
ANKENY, Iowa — Ankeny’s police chief is apologizing after a video surfaced showing an officer trying to search a motorist’s car because, according to the officer, everyone who plays Frisbee golf smokes pot.
The video, which was taken by the motorist, starts with the officer giving that unknown motorist a warning about driving without headlights. Then the officer begins his interrogation. “You play frisbee golf?” the officer asks. “I do actually. I play out at Heritage (Park)” the motorist replies. So the officer says, “OK. I need you to answer me a question. Why is it that everybody that plays Frisbee golf smokes weed?” “No, it’s not everybody,” the motorist insists. “It’s everybody, man. You can’t tell me you never smoked weed,” the officer says. The motorist replies, “I’m not gonna tell you one way or another.” So the officer says, “See, there you go. How much weed do you have in the car today?”
