Plaintiff\u2019s claim unauthorized officers executed the search warrant under state law isn\u2019t a Fourth Amendment violation. Richard v. Jeffcoat, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1512 (D.S.C. Jan. 5, 2026).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Based on the search warrant, \u201cThe government may not disclose [at trial] what was being searched for other than weapons, unless Staples opens the door to such items.\u201d United States v. Staples, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1397 (D. Nev. Jan. 5, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Officers broke in to defendant\u2019s apartment when no one came to the door. Inside he was briefly handcuffed then unhandcuffed. He was told he was not under arrest and didn\u2019t have to answer any questions. He mentioned \u201cprovoking a lawyer.\u201d But, \u201cDefendant’s conduct on the video is compelling evidence that his subsequent waiver was knowing. During this exchange with S.A. Chacon, Defendant pauses for approximately eight seconds and only then begins to talk to the agents about Jane Doe #1 and the case against him.\u201d United States v. McLeod, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 269315 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 12, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Plaintiff\u2019s claim unauthorized officers executed the search warrant under state law isn\u2019t a Fourth Amendment violation. Richard v. Jeffcoat, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1512 (D.S.C. Jan. 5, 2026). Based on the search warrant, \u201cThe government may not disclose [at trial] … Continue reading