{"id":59761,"date":"2025-01-03T15:12:30","date_gmt":"2025-01-03T20:12:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=59761"},"modified":"2025-01-03T15:13:40","modified_gmt":"2025-01-03T20:13:40","slug":"59761","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=59761","title":{"rendered":"NJ: Search not suppressed because bodycam wasn&#8217;t turned on"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>New Jersey has a bodycam directive that was apparently violated by the officers not turning theirs on before a search. Failure to turn on the bodycams was not a constitutional violation, and the court refuses to suppress. In addition, \u201cthe trial court was not required to apply a \u2018rebuttable presumption\u2019 or draw a \u2018negative inference\u2019 against the State. Even so, the trial court did consider the \u2018failure to record the audio demonstrating that officers knocked and announced.\u2019 As we have noted, [Officer] Pichardo acknowledged that he should have activated his BWC earlier. The record shows, moreover, Pichardo was subjected to skillful cross-examination, after which the trial court found he was credible.\u201d <a href=\"https:\/\/www.njcourts.gov\/system\/files\/court-opinions\/2025\/a0496-23redacted.pdf\">State v. Seligman<\/a>, 2025 N.J. Super. LEXIS 2 (Jan. 3, 2025).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>2254 petitioner\u2019s Fourth Amendment claim barred by Stone. 1996&#8217;s AEDPA didn\u2019t expand a right to habeas. Rodriguez v. AG of N.M., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 490 (D.N.M. Jan. 2, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Nexus to defendant\u2019s fraud scheme was shown to likely be at his house because of the officer\u2019s experience shown in the affidavit that records of a fraud are often kept at home and the fact the home address was listed as a business address, too. United States v. Bock, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 492 (D. Minn. Jan. 2, 2025).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>New Jersey has a bodycam directive that was apparently violated by the officers not turning theirs on before a search. Failure to turn on the bodycams was not a constitutional violation, and the court refuses to suppress. In addition, \u201cthe &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=59761\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[89,126,56,38,16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-59761","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-body-cameras","category-issue-preclusion","category-knock-and-announce","category-nexus","category-warrant-execution"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59761","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=59761"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59761\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":59763,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59761\/revisions\/59763"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=59761"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=59761"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=59761"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}