Michigan Lawyers Weekly: Class action certified for tax debtors’ Fourth Amendment claims against state treasury by Ed Wesoloski

A restaurateur who was trying to work out his tax problems with the Michigan Department of Treasury is the lead plaintiff in a class action suit that alleges treasury agents routinely searched premises and seized assets without judicially authorized warrants.

. . .

Miri alleges that from Dec. 1, 2008 to Dec. 1, 2011, the treasury department violated the Fourth Amendment in 162 instances where agents made nonconsensual searches and seizures under the authority of warrants issued and executed without judicial authority.

NYTimes Editorial: Eavesdropping on Internet Communications:

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has a new plan to intercept Internet messages, calls and video chats. Instead of requiring companies like Skype and Google to build surveillance capabilities into their services as it suggested in 2010, the F.B.I. now proposes fining companies that fail to comply with court-ordered wiretaps.

The juvenile left the school grounds and went to his truck across the street and came back to the school. He was searched when he came back on the school grounds, and nothing was found. School officials then searched his truck across the street. That search exceeded their authority, and drug paraphernalia was found. The student’s 19 day suspension was reversed (already served) and ordered purged from his record. J.P. v. Mlllard Pub. Schs, 285 Neb. 890, 2013 Neb. LEXIS 78 (May 17, 2013).

Defendant’s stop was not prolonged to get consent, particularly because defendant consented within about four minutes of the stop. Powell v. State, 2013 Ark. App. 322, 2013 Ark. App. LEXIS 335 (May 15, 2013).*

The district court disbelieved that defendant effectively withdrew his consent to search his computer for child pornography. The evidence supports that. United States v. Schaefer, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 9885 (2d Cir. May 17, 2013).*

Defendant was stopped in his blue Buick because dispatch reported the license plate belonged to a red pickup truck. That was legal cause for the stop. During the stop, the officer always had defendants’ DL in hand, and defendant consented to a search of the car. After the search, the officer learned that dispatch was mistaken, and the vehicle was lawfully registered. The consent search was still valid because the stop was valid, and the stop was not too long. State v. Elkins, 2013 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 406 (May 16, 2013).

Defendant’s non-conditional plea was a waiver of the denial of the motion to suppress. United States v. Jackson, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 9831 (4th Cir. May 16, 2013).*

There was reasonable suspicion to stop the defendant after a detailed call from a CI. When following him, he pulled over like he was trying to lose his tail. He took off again and went to an address known for drug dealing. State v. Harrison, 2013 Iowa App. LEXIS 524 (May 15, 2013).*

Defendant was stopped in front of his house, and he was roaming around freely until the officers asked him for a frisk, which he objectively agreed to. State v. Pierce, 2013 Iowa App. LEXIS 541 (May 15, 2013).*

Defendant’s car was parked “oddly” and an officer stopped to probably issue a parking ticket. When he got up to the car, he found people in it. Talking to two girls, he found they were out in violation of curfew, and he ordered them out of the car. A gun was revealed and defendant was charged with it. The situation escalated to probable cause. State v. Choice, 2013 Ohio 2013, 2013 Ohio App. LEXIS 1915 (2d Dist. May 17, 2013).*

A report of occupants of a car asleep on the median of I-75 brought a police officer. Just before he got there, the car was reported to have moved on, so he went looking for them to see if they were under the influence of something, considering the unusual place they were stopped. When they found the car stopped again, one of the occupants was reaching down, and they feared a gun. A passenger was concealing his hands, too. “Once the officers drew their weapons and ordered Cook to show his hands, an investigative stop had occurred.” Defendant was handcuffed and put in the backseat of the police car. There, his feet wouldn’t stop moving. The officer got him out and searched his feet finding drugs in his sock. The search of the sock was valid. State v. Cook, 2013 Ohio 2014, 2013 Ohio App. LEXIS 1913 (2d Dist. May 17, 2013).*

Police were called to an assault, and they were told that an orange Avalanche truck had left the seen with the assailant. An officer on the way saw an orange Avalanche truck coming from that direction. What are the odds of two such trucks at that hour? Also he couldn’t be sure the truck stopped at an intersection. There was reasonable suspicion for the stop. State v. Johnson, 2013 Ohio 2017, 2013 Ohio App. LEXIS 1918 (2d Dist. May 17, 2013).*

During his stop, defendant first reached for his waistband and refused to put his hands on the wheel and he was ordered out of the car. Once out, he stiffened up and turned sideways. The officer feared a weapon and frisked him feeling gelcaps, which he “100% believed” contained heroin, so it was “immediately apparent” to him for plain feel purposes defendant had drugs. State v. Price, 2013 Ohio 2020, 2013 Ohio App. LEXIS 1920 (2d Dist. May 17, 2013).*

Defendant was an American Indian, and he thought that the tribal governor had authorized the police to investigate his killing of eagles. His subjective belief as to the officers’ actions was not relevant to the Fourth Amendment inquiry as to what the officers believed from the objective facts. [So, boiled down to its essence: this is an example of a good faith warrantless search.] United States v. Aguilar, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 9894 (10th Cir. May 17, 2013):

=> Read more!

The question of reliability of the drug dog was for the trial court, and the court decided that past false alerts did not undermine the probable cause. Jackson v. State, 2013 Ark. 201, 2013 Ark. LEXIS 243 (May 16, 2013):

=> Read more!