NY: Coercing a suspect out of his home for a warrantless arrest violates Payton

Posted on February 21, 2026 by Hall

Coercing a suspect out of his home for a warrantless arrest violates Payton. [But here, the error is harmless on the murder and assault charges.] People v. Shaw, 2026 NY Slip Op 00961, 2026 N.Y. LEXIS 130 (Feb. 19, 2026):

Continue reading →
Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest | Comments Off on NY: Coercing a suspect out of his home for a warrantless arrest violates Payton

M.D.Fla.: Reporting requirements for real estate transactions under Bank Secrecy Act do not violate 4A

Posted on February 21, 2026 by Hall

The financial reporting requirements for real estate transactions under the Bank Secrecy Act satisfy the statutory requirements which are more onerous than the Fourth Amendment requires under Shultz. Therefore, there’s no Fourth Amendment violation. An inquiry can be made, as with administrative warrants, with just official curiosity. Fid. Nat’l Fin., Inc. v. Bessent, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33478 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 19, 2026):

Continue reading →
Posted in Administrative search | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: Reporting requirements for real estate transactions under Bank Secrecy Act do not violate 4A

techdirt: It Looks Like The FBI Straight Up Lied To A Judge To Get Permission To Seize Georgia Voting Records

Posted on February 21, 2026 by Hall

Begging the question: What consequences are there for a Franks violation, besides a Franks hearing and maybe just suppression of evidence? Or here, return of the evidence? Rebuke? Prosecution for false statement or worse? See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 (false statement to federal officer) & 1621 (perjury).

techdirt: It Looks Like The FBI Straight Up Lied To A Judge To Get Permission To Seize Georgia Voting Records by Tim Cushing:

Continue reading →
Posted in Franks doctrine, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on techdirt: It Looks Like The FBI Straight Up Lied To A Judge To Get Permission To Seize Georgia Voting Records

OH8: Affidavit for SW was improperly admitted into evidence of guilt at trial

Posted on February 20, 2026 by Hall

Affidavit for search warrant was improperly admitted into evidence of guilt at trial. It was full of hearsay and the burden for probable cause is too low for reasonable doubt. Also, admitting a video violated the confrontation clause. State v. Smith, 2026-Ohio-552, 2026 Ohio App. LEXIS 601 (8th Dist. Feb. 13, 2026):

Continue reading →
Posted in Admissibility of evidence | Comments Off on OH8: Affidavit for SW was improperly admitted into evidence of guilt at trial

OR: Pole camera doesn’t violate state constitution

Posted on February 20, 2026 by Hall

Pole camera observation didn’t violate the Oregon Constitution. State v. Lane, 347 Or. App. 229 (Feb. 19, 2026).

Probable cause developed after the stop but before the search under the automobile exception. There was also consent. United States v. Camorlinga, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32720 (D. Or. Feb. 18, 2026).*

Defendant’s stop for speeding led to smelling marijuana and a search. Five days later, officers observed him doing an apparent hand-to-hand transaction. There was probable cause for both searches. United States v. Tucker, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32781 (D.S.C. Feb. 18, 2026).*

Defendant’s motion to suppress that alleges no facts as to his arrest allegedly without probable cause states essentially nothing. People v. Honyghan, 2026 NY Slip Op 50154 (N.Y. Co. Feb. 5, 2026).*

Posted in Automobile exception, Burden of pleading, Plain view, feel, smell, Pole cameras, State constitution | Comments Off on OR: Pole camera doesn’t violate state constitution

M.D.Fla.: SW return filed outside state law time limit isn’t a Franks issue

Posted on February 20, 2026 by Hall

A search warrant return outside the state law time limit by law is not a Franks issue. United States v. Davis, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33100 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 18, 2026).

Plaintiff “fails to specifically address, and thus waives any challenge to, the district court’s determination that a favorable finding on his Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment interrogation, Sixth Amendment, and general due process claims would necessarily imply the invalidity of his state conviction or sentence.” Goodson v. City of Dallas, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 4837 (5th Cir. Feb. 18, 2026).*

Plaintiff is a convicted sex offender on probation. He was left on GPS monitoring for years too long. His claim is a state claim, not a Fourth Amendment claim. Wroblewski v. Schroeder, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33090 (W.D. Wis. Feb. 17, 2026).*

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine, GPS / Tracking Data, Warrant papers | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: SW return filed outside state law time limit isn’t a Franks issue

C.D.Cal.: Suit over seizure of guns on mental health order dismissed

Posted on February 19, 2026 by Hall

Officers had a court order under Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 8100 for taking plaintiff’s guns because of a mental health hold. They came to his house but he was gone. They talked to him through his Ring doorbell. His therapist made the call that started it. They got the guns from him. Case over the guns dismissed. Hill v. L.A. Cty. Sheriff’s Dep’t, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31135 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 11, 2026).*

“The warrant limits the digital search to electronic devices and files ‘constituting evidence of sexual exploitation of children,’ not a full forensic search of every device and file as Mr. Quinlan asserts. Although the warrant lacks a temporal limitation, the constituting evidence of language distinguishes this warrant from the Galpin warrant found to lack particularity for failure to ‘provid[e] the forensic examiner with any guidance or limitations as to what kinds of files might be relevant.’ … Although the language of the warrant issued here could have been drafted more artfully, the court finds the limiting language sufficiently connects the items to be seized to the crime of sexual exploitation of children.” United States v. Quinlan, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30725 (D. Vt. Feb. 13, 2026).*

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Computer and cloud searches | Comments Off on C.D.Cal.: Suit over seizure of guns on mental health order dismissed

Reason: Was It a Coincidental Traffic Stop or AI-Powered Surveillance?

Posted on February 19, 2026 by Hall

Reason: Was It a Coincidental Traffic Stop or AI-Powered Surveillance? by Mattha Busby (“Seth Ferranti was driving his Ford pickup on a southeastern Nebraska stretch of the interstate in November 2024 when law enforcement pulled him over, claiming that he had wobbled onto the hard shoulder. As the Seward County sheriff’s deputies questioned Ferranti, a filmmaker who had spent 21 years in prison for distributing LSD, they allegedly smelled cannabis. Declaring this probable cause for a search, they searched the vehicle and discovered more than 400 pounds of marijuana. But were those the actual reasons for the stop and search? When Ferranti went on trial, his attorneys presented a license plate reader report produced by the security communications company Motorola Solutions. It revealed Ferranti had been consistently monitored prior to his arrest, including by the local sheriff on the day he was apprehended.”)

Posted in AI | Comments Off on Reason: Was It a Coincidental Traffic Stop or AI-Powered Surveillance?

NPR: Some cities are ditching license plate readers over immigration surveillance concerns

Posted on February 19, 2026 by Hall

NPR: Some cities are ditching license plate readers over immigration surveillance concerns by Jude Joffe-Block (“The use of automatic license plate readers has exploded across the country in recent years. The cameras on roads and freeways that take images of the back of passing cars are popular with police for solving crimes. But as President Trump’s immigration enforcement crackdown has escalated in recent months, residents of various American cities are urging local leaders to stop using these cameras, citing fears of mass surveillance and concerns that local data could be aiding a federal deportation dragnet. Many of the grassroots campaigns have targeted cameras made by Flock Safety, an Atlanta-based company that has contracts with more than 5,000 law enforcement agencies across the country. Some cities have grappled with the issue and decided to keep their cameras due to public safety, but in a number of places, the pressure has worked. The liberal college towns of Flagstaff, Ariz., Cambridge, Mass., Eugene, Ore. and Santa Cruz, Calif., are among a list of at least 30 localities that have either deactivated their Flock cameras or canceled their contracts since the beginning of 2025 – with much of the activity happening in just the last three months.”)

Posted in Automatic license plate readers | Comments Off on NPR: Some cities are ditching license plate readers over immigration surveillance concerns

E.D.N.Y.: It’s not actually required a cell phone be involved in a crime; it’s whether it is likely it was

Posted on February 19, 2026 by Hall

It’s not constitutionally required to show that a cell phone was actually used in a crime for probable cause to search it. It’s enough that it likely could have. “A law enforcement-affiant’s personal expertise combined with attestation to a defendant’s membership in a criminal enterprise and ‘familiar[ity] with the manner in which gang members and individuals engaged in violent crime use cell phones in connection with such activity’ can establish probable cause for a cellphone warrant.” quoting United States v. Silva, 146 F.4th 183, 186, 192-93 (2d Cir. 2025). United States v. Rodriguez, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31991 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 17, 2026).

When an officer fires his gun, any person hit is “seized.” Kilnapp v. City of Cleveland, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 4817 (6th Cir. Feb. 18, 2026).

The record is undeveloped to make a determination whether the exclusionary rule should be applied. Remanded to the trial court for further hearings. People v. Conley, 2026 Mich. App. LEXIS 1330 (Feb. 9, 2026) (unpublished).*

Posted in Cell phones, Exclusionary rule, Nexus, Probable cause, Seizure | Comments Off on E.D.N.Y.: It’s not actually required a cell phone be involved in a crime; it’s whether it is likely it was

TN: No standing in someone else’s curtilage

Posted on February 19, 2026 by Hall

Defendant pulled his car into a convenient driveway for his stop, but he had no standing in the curtilage because it wasn’t his place. The car he had standing in, but this was a plain view. State v. Gunn, 2026 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 75 (Crim. App. Feb. 18, 2026).

The stop for a traffic offense ripened into reasonable suspicion for further investigation as the officer followed up a tip. State v. Williams, 2026 N.C. App. LEXIS 92 (Feb. 18, 2026).*

“Based on these principles and the totality of the circumstances, we discern no error in the district court’s determination that the officers here had reasonable suspicion to support Jenkins’s seizure. The officers received their tip from an individual who made his report in person and provided the officers with all of his personal identifying information. The basis of informant’s knowledge–his presence with Jenkins throughout the day, knowledge of the firearm’s location, and awareness of the corroborating timing of his suspicions-supported his tip’s reliability. Finally, the officers corroborated several aspects of the tip before detaining Jenkins.” United States v. Jenkins, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 4795 (4th Cir. Feb. 18, 2026).*

Posted in Curtilage, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on TN: No standing in someone else’s curtilage

PA: RS not needed to seize firearm on car seat in plain view during traffic stop

Posted on February 19, 2026 by Hall

The inherent dangers in a traffic stop justified the officer doing a protective sweep to seize a firearm on the seat in plain view, despite lack of any sense that defendant was going to use it. Commonwealth v. Hawkins-Davenport, 2026 Pa. LEXIS 266 (Feb. 18, 2026), affirming Commonwealth v. Hawkins-Davenport, 319 A.3d 537 (Pa. Super. 2024):

Continue reading →
Posted in Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on PA: RS not needed to seize firearm on car seat in plain view during traffic stop

AR: Trial counsel’s comment motion to suppress ruling was correct didn’t bind appellate counsel

Posted on February 19, 2026 by Hall

A motion to suppress once made and denied doesn’t have to be renewed during the proof. Trial counsel’s statement that the ruling was correct didn’t bind appellate counsel to raise it, but it loses on the merits anyway. Cobb v. State, 2026 Ark. App. 109 (Feb. 18, 2026).

Plaintiff pled guilty to his offense and then tried a § 1983 case. The court can’t say that it is conclusively barred by Heck at this point. See Haring v. Prosise, 462 U.S. 306 (1983). Brewster v. Virginia, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31703 (W.D. Va. Feb. 17, 2026).*

By collective knowledge, the officers had probable cause to make a warrantless arrest. United States v. Estrada, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31528 (N.D. Tex. Feb. 16, 2026).*

Defendant’s lane change that affected other cars was sufficient for a stop. Claypoole v. State, 2026 Ark. App. 107 (Feb. 18, 2026).*

Posted in Collective knowledge, Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on AR: Trial counsel’s comment motion to suppress ruling was correct didn’t bind appellate counsel

Lincoln Square: Hate ICE? Social Media Companies Will Snitch on You.

Posted on February 19, 2026 by Hall

Lincoln Square: Hate ICE? Social Media Companies Will Snitch on You. by Frank Figliuzzi (FBI retired):

Continue reading →
Posted in Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters | Comments Off on Lincoln Square: Hate ICE? Social Media Companies Will Snitch on You.

E.D.Mo.: Such is the risk of a no-knock warrant

Posted on February 18, 2026 by Hall

“This case arises from an officer shooting the target of a search warrant. Detective Thomas Strode obtained a warrant to search Don Clark’s residence for illegal guns and drugs. As officers entered without knocking, Clark shot at the officers but missed. Officer Nicholas Manasco shot and killed Clark. Clark’s family sued Strode, Manasco, and the City of St. Louis, alleging violations of the Fourth Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment, and state law. The officers and the City moved for summary judgment. None of the evidence Clark’s family submitted is sufficient to establish that Strode’s warrant lacked probable cause (and that he knew or should have known that), nor that a reasonable officer in Manasco’s position would have been required not to use deadly force. The Court grants the motion for summary judgment.” Clark v. City of St. Louis, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30695 (E.D. Mo. Feb. 13, 2026).*

Posted in Excessive force, Knock and announce, Warrant execution | Comments Off on E.D.Mo.: Such is the risk of a no-knock warrant

IA approves residence indicia warrant

Posted on February 18, 2026 by Hall

This was a search warrant for indicia of defendant’s residence. State v. Uranga, 2026 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 20 (Feb. 13, 2026) (§ 56.18 n.2).

Defendant was tried in 2012 and if his counsel had made a motion to suppress cell phone data before Carpenter in 2018, he would have lost because the state courts held there was no reasonable expectation of privacy back then. Therefore, no ineffective assistance of counsel in 2012. Bradford v. State, 2026 Ga. LEXIS 52 (Feb. 17, 2026).*

Defendant’s Franks challenge fails. She complained of three omissions, but probable cause was shown anyway. Also, “Ultimately, it was appropriate for the magistrate to consider the information provided by unnamed DHHS workers when determining whether probable cause supported the issuance of the warrant.” People v. White, 2026 Mich. App. LEXIS 1306 (Feb. 13, 2026).*

Posted in Cell site location information, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on IA approves residence indicia warrant

OH8: Apt building maintenance workers consented to administrative elevator inspections

Posted on February 18, 2026 by Hall

Cleveland’s city elevator inspector got permission from the maintenance persons at three apartment buildings in Cleveland to conduct regular inspections. This was all by consent. The court thus does not have to decide whether the inspections were also valid as a part of a regulatory scheme. City of Cleveland v. Shaker Heights Apartments Owner LLC, 2026-Ohio-449 (8th Dist. Feb. 12, 2026).*

Officers got a tip that defendant was a drug dealer. They set up surveillance. She didn’t leave the house much at all and she had two cars, one with an out of state plate, and surveillance cameras. That suggested to them she was a drug dealer. Then they did a trash pull finding marijuana and used paraphernalia. That was probable cause for a warrant. State v. Revuelta, 2026 UT App 21 (Feb. 12, 2026).*

Defendant had fled police before. This time, they followed until he stopped and got out of the car, and they approached the passenger who denied knowing him. This involved a reasonable plain view and protective sweep of the car. Jones v. State, 2026 Fla. App. LEXIS 1259 (Fla. 6th DCA Feb. 13, 2026).*

Posted in Administrative search, Consent, Plain view, feel, smell, Probable cause, Protective sweep | Comments Off on OH8: Apt building maintenance workers consented to administrative elevator inspections

D.Conn.: Officers muting microphones to discuss extending stop helped show Rodriguez violation

Posted on February 18, 2026 by Hall

The stop was justified, but the stop was unreasonably extended for the drug dog that didn’t alert. Then the officers muted their microphones for 40 seconds before a search of defendant’s person. “The officers’ choice to spend several minutes on off-microphone discussions after completing all traffic-related tasks embodies the type of ‘bonus time to pursue an unrelated criminal investigation’ that must be scrutinized under Rodriguez.” United States v. Gray, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30918 (D. Conn. Feb. 15, 2026).

The search here was supported by plain view and smell of alcohol. Widgeon v. Commonwealth, 2026 Va. App. LEXIS 103 (Feb. 17, 2026).*

Under state law, an unmade motion to suppress would have to clearly have succeeded to be ineffective assistance of counsel for not making it. Here, it would have failed on the merits because there was nexus. Chapple v. State, 2026 Ga. LEXIS 55 (Feb. 17, 2026).*

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Plain view, feel, smell, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.Conn.: Officers muting microphones to discuss extending stop helped show Rodriguez violation

IN: Jamming to music or twitching from drugs?

Posted on February 18, 2026 by Hall

So, was defendant’s jerking movement in his car at 8 am him “jamming” or “grooving” to music or under the influence of a stimulant drug? Not enough here for reasonable suspicion. This is but a hunch. Wilson v. State, 2026 Ind. App. LEXIS 51 (Feb. 16, 2026)*:

Continue reading →
Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on IN: Jamming to music or twitching from drugs?

CA3: Second protective sweep was justified by noise inside

Posted on February 17, 2026 by Hall

The premises had been subjected to a protective sweep seeing firearms, locked up, and a search warrant was sought. Officers heard a noise inside and came in and found defendant and he’d apparently moved one of the guns. The initial entry for the protective sweep was justified by the circumstances. The reentry for defendant’s moving around was, too. United States v. Pope, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 4625 (3d Cir. Feb. 17, 2026).

Driving with one low beam light out was reasonable suspicion for a stop. Cairo v. State, 2026 Md. App. LEXIS 185 (Feb. 13, 2026) (unpublished).*

This search warrant was executed to establish whether an uncommunicative registered sex offender lived there. State v. Uranga, 2026 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 20 (Feb. 13, 2026).*

Posted in Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA3: Second protective sweep was justified by noise inside