In prison, \u201cthe visual strip search and the monitored bowel movement did not violate the Fourth Amendment.\u201d McDonald v. Spears, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107383 (N.D. Fla. Apr. 6, 2026).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s consent to search his cell phone was limited and narrow, and the officer\u2019s exceeding the scope of consent justifies suppression of that part. United States v. Hernandez, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106625 (S.D. Tex. May 13, 2026).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The state sought a BAC warrant after a fatal accident when defendant first refused a breath test. He later consented to a breath test. That doesn\u2019t void the warrant. People v. Santa Clara Cty. Superior Court, 2026 Cal. App. LEXIS 298 (6th Dist. May 14, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Immigration arrest warrants don\u2019t need to be signed by judicial officers. Mong C. ex rel. Uphaphon P. v. Mullin, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106559 (D. Minn. May 14, 2026).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In prison, \u201cthe visual strip search and the monitored bowel movement did not violate the Fourth Amendment.\u201d McDonald v. Spears, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107383 (N.D. Fla. Apr. 6, 2026). Defendant\u2019s consent to search his cell phone was limited and … Continue reading