{"id":64710,"date":"2026-08-26T14:07:41","date_gmt":"2026-08-26T19:07:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=64710"},"modified":"2026-08-26T14:07:41","modified_gmt":"2026-08-26T19:07:41","slug":"ks-running-warrants-on-a-passed-out-person-is-reasonable","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=64710","title":{"rendered":"KS: Running warrants on a passed out person is reasonable"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Defendant was passed out under a bridge, and the fire department and police were called. Firemen got her name and police ran a warrants check, finding one, and they arrested her. That was reasonable. State v. Willard<\/a>, 2026 Kan. LEXIS 396 (Aug. 21, 2026).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The motion for reconsideration is denied. The government waited two years to get a warrant for defendant\u2019s cell phone, and, after it was denied, it waited 67 days to reapply. The phone\u2019s owner still had a possessory interest in the phone, and the delay was unreasonable. \u201cThe government’s motion for reconsideration does not meet this strict standard. It does not identify any controlling precedent that the Court overlooked. Daskal is neither controlling nor contrary to this Court’s analysis. The government’s alternative argument under Smith merely seeks to relitigate old issues under new theories.\u201d In re Application for Search Warrant for Two Cellular Phones, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188952 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 21, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIndividually, these factors would likely not provide reasonable suspicion.\u201d Collectively, they did. People v. McKimmy, 2026 Colo. App. LEXIS 1610 (Aug. 20, 2026).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Defendant was passed out under a bridge, and the fire department and police were called. Firemen got her name and police ran a warrants check, finding one, and they arrested her. That was reasonable. State v. Willard, 2026 Kan. LEXIS … Continue reading →<\/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":[50,5,18,35,63],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-64710","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-arrest-or-entry-on-arrest","category-cell-phones","category-reasonable-expectation-of-privacy","category-reasonable-suspicion","category-reasonableness"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64710","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=64710"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64710\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":64711,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64710\/revisions\/64711"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=64710"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=64710"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=64710"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}