The immediately apparent prong of plain view requires probable cause for being apparent. United States v. Brown, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52652 (N.D. Ga. Jan. 30, 2025), adopted, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50975 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 20, 2025).
“In this appeal by permission, we consider whether the investigating detective’s opening statement to appellant Keith Lamar Foster (Foster) that he was not a suspect, when in fact the detective had already obtained a search warrant for his DNA, so misrepresented the nature of their interaction as to render Foster’s subsequent statement involuntary under the totality of the circumstances test prescribed by the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. We agree with the Superior Court that, under the circumstances present here, the misrepresentation, itself, did not outweigh the non-coercive, voluntary nature of the interview. In other words, we hold that a misrepresentation to an interviewee that he is not a suspect, when in fact police consider him a suspect, does not, per se, transform a voluntary statement into an involuntary one under the Fifth Amendment. Thus, we affirm the order of the Superior Court.” Commonwealth v. Foster, 2025 Pa. LEXIS 396 (Mar. 20, 2025).*
Plaintiff admitted on the bodycam video that his stop was essentially valid, so that eliminates that factual dispute. McClain v. Delgado, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6558 (5th Cir. Mar. 20, 2025).*
71-day delay in getting search warrant to access defendant’s cell phone was reasonable where the delay was attributed to waiting for a software update for their device because the iPhone was a newer model. United States v. Powell, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6590 (9th Cir. Mar. 19, 2025).*
“We determine that Tate failed to preserve error on his argument that ‘the magistrate failed to make credibility determinations in the order granting the search warrant concerning the confidential informant.’ We therefore affirm without reaching the merits of Tate’s appeal.” State v. Tate, 2025 Iowa App. LEXIS 257 (Mar. 19, 2025).*
Appellant lost his Franks challenge below and then pled guilty without a conditional plea. He wouldn’t have won any appeal of the Franks challenge. United States v. Petitfrere, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50957 (E.D. Ky. Feb. 26, 2025).*
Exhibit A to the search warrant wasn’t present at the search so the officers didn’t know all that was seized. Here, plain view carries the search anyway. United States v. Gilmore, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6581 (11th Cir. Mar. 21, 2025).*
Courthouse News Service: Obscurity shrouds state court rulings by Bill Girdner (“Rulings and judgments in state courts are falling into obscurity. A simple filter would open that work product to public view.”)
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on Courthouse News Service: Obscurity shrouds state court rulings
Defendant’s agreement to let police see his firearm isn’t implied consent to enter his house. United States v. Arthur, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51621 (S.D. W. Va. Mar. 20, 2025).
Defendant failed to plead standing in his motion to suppress despite the court seeking it. United States v. Williams, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51595 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 6, 2025),* adopted, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50702 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 18, 2025).*
“It was Peek’s burden to demonstrate standing, but the conflicting evidence in the record simply does not support finding that Peek has demonstrated that he had the permission of the owner of the white Honda to use the vehicle and was in lawful possession of the vehicle when he was stopped.” However, even if he had standing, he loses on the merits. United States v. Peek, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51594 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 6, 2025),* adopted, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50721 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 18, 2025).*
Plain view of a firearm in the house where police were executing an arrest warrant was reasonable. United States v. Brown, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50975 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 20, 2025).*
Posted inConsent, Plain view, feel, smell, Standing|Comments Off on S.D.W.Va.: Def’s agreement to let police see his firearm isn’t implied consent to enter his house
This documents warrant was particular. While it sought a lot of information, that alone didn’t make it overbroad. It was also limited in time to six months of information. People v. Rodriguez-Ortiz, 2025 COA 30 (Mar. 20, 2025):
NYTimes: 23andMe Files for Bankruptcy Amid Concerns About Security of Customers’ Genetic Data by Yan Zhuang (“The genetic testing company 23andMe filed for bankruptcy protection on Sunday after months of uncertainty over its business model and mounting concerns about the security of the troves of customer data it holds. In a statement, 23andMe said it had filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy to ‘facilitate a sale process to maximize the value of its business’ and make further cost reductions. Anne Wojcicki, chief executive of 23andMe, announced that she had resigned in order to bid on the company.”)
WaPo: Delete your DNA from 23andMe right now (“The genetic information company declared bankruptcy on Sunday, and California’s attorney general has issued a privacy ‘consumer alert.’”)
Posted inDNA|Comments Off on NYTimes: 23andMe Files for Bankruptcy Amid Concerns About Security of Customers’ Genetic Data
Officers approached defendant’s house for a knock-and-talk at 10:43 pm. There is no implied license to enter the curtilage at that time, but here it was because officers were responding to a report of a dangerous situation, and that made it reasonable. People v. ASK, 2025 Mich. App. LEXIS 2161 (Mar. 19, 2025) (unpublished):
Posted inCurtilage, Knock and talk, Nighttime search|Comments Off on MI: Nighttime entry onto curtilage was reasonable because officers were responding to a dangerous situation
Asking the same question of defendant a different way three times while doing the traffic citation did not unreasonably prolong the stop. The officer said he was not trying to be “robotic” sounding. United States v. Burns, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50996 (D. Neb. Mar. 20, 2025).
CI’s controlled buy from plaintiff’s home supported probable cause for his arrest, and this § 1983 case was properly disposed of on summary judgment, despite the fact he spent 19 months in jail and the criminal case was dismissed. His Franks claim based on speculation of a conspiracy to frame him fails. Rainey v. Lewis, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6500 (7th Cir. Mar. 20, 2025).*
Patdown producing cash after finding drugs during traffic stop was reasonable as search incident. Clemons v. State, 2025 Iowa App. LEXIS 244 (Mar. 19, 2025).*
The affidavit for warrant established the CI’s reliability and basis of knowledge. State v. Barnes, 2025 Iowa App. LEXIS 248 (Mar. 19, 2025).*
Officers saw defendant “dissecting a motor vehicle in his driveway,” i.e., running a chop shop, which they already suspected him of. They could enter the curtilage to inquire. Commonwealth v. Ewida, 2025 PA Super 67, 2025 Pa. Super. LEXIS 128 (Mar. 20, 2025).
There is a presumption that there was probable cause for a search warrant, and defendant doesn’t show this one was lacking. Moreover, “The defendant has failed to provide any evidence to indicate, let alone establish, that the officers did not act in good faith in obtaining the search warrants of March 26 and April 5, 2024 and executing them.” United States v. Bailey, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50460 (W.D.N.Y. Feb. 5, 2025).*
Texas consent must be by clear and convincing evidence, and this wasn’t. “Despite the fact that the investigative detention had concluded without finding any weapons or contraband, the two investigating officers did not move. They were both within arm’s reach, if not closer, of appellant, restraining his movement and preventing him from turning around before he was asked to consent to a search of his person. They forced his hands on the hood of the vehicle. The situation, like that in Carmouche, would not have led a reasonable person to conclude the search was optional.” Madas v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 1863 (Tex. App. – Houston (14th Dist.) Mar. 20, 2025).*
Posted inConsent, Curtilage, Probable cause|Comments Off on PA: Entry of curtilage to inquire of a chop shop in operation was reasonable
Under a parole search of one Scott in his home, the PO had authority to frisk the visitor defendant if he had safety concerns or reasonable suspicion, and here they did not. Commonwealth v. Gibson, 2025 PA Super 65, 2025 Pa. Super. LEXIS 127 (Mar. 19, 2025).
Defendant’s claim the stop was prolonged without reasonable suspicion fails. There was a warrant for his arrest. United States v. Rainey, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6452 (6th Cir. Mar. 19, 2025).*
As to a Franks claim: “As the Magistrate Judge concluded, Petitfrere’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel fails because he has not alleged any facts suggesting that his attorney’s performance was deficient nor shown that he was prejudiced by such performance.” United States v. Petitfrere, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49841 (E.D. Ky. Mar. 19, 2025).*
A threat to arrest for trespass doesn’t state a Fourth Amendment claim. Kelly v. Gallagher, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49905 (D. Ariz. Mar. 18, 2025).*
The Record: The NYPD is sending more drones to 911 calls, but privacy advocates don’t like the view by Suzanne Smalley (“City officials say the so-called drones as first responders (DFR) program is making New York safer, but civil liberties and privacy advocates argue that police have not been transparent about operations that allow law enforcement sweeping surveillance capabilities that could easily be abused … Law enforcement agencies deploying DFRs are taking advantage of a lack of legal precedent, said Sidney Thaxter, a senior litigator at the Fourth Amendment Center at the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. While there is case law saying that people have no reasonable right to privacy in their backyard when being observed by a helicopter, courts have not yet ruled on aerial privacy rights under drones, he said. Drones are far smaller, quieter and less noticeable than helicopters, making the court rulings outdated, Thaxter said.”)
Posted inDrones|Comments Off on The Record: The NYPD is sending more drones to 911 calls, but privacy advocates don’t like the view
The Marshall Project: Mississippi’s No-Knock Raids Have Led to Death and Injury. Dozens of Warrants Lacked Clear Justification. (“During a 2015 no-knock drug raid in Mississippi’s rural northeast corner, sheriff’s deputies shot and killed 57-year-old Ricky Keeton after he came to the door with an air pistol as SWAT team members forced their way into his trailer home at 1 a.m. Keeton’s death received little public attention at the time. Keeton’s three daughters sued, arguing that Monroe County deputies had no constitutional authority that night to burst into their father’s home with a battering ram and pry bar without first knocking and identifying themselves … Since the Keeton killing in 2015, judges in six courts across the state have approved at least 62 no-knock search warrants that failed to show that they met basic constitutional standards, an investigation by The Marshall Project–Jackson and the Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal found.”)
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on The Marshall Project: Mississippi’s No-Knock Raids Have Led to Death and Injury. Dozens of Warrants Lacked Clear Justification.
Following defendant in an unmarked car was not a seizure. Defendant ultimately voluntarily stopped and talked to the officer. State v. Serini, 2025 Ore. App. LEXIS 446 (Mar. 19, 2025).*
When defendant was placed in the patrol car, the officer had reasonable suspicion that he was under the influence. Martinez-Orta v. State, 2025 Ind. App. LEXIS 78 (Mar. 18, 2025).*
The person handing over a bag of ammunition had apparent authority to do so, and the contents of the bag were immediately apparently. United States v. Smith, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6399 (4th Cir. Mar. 19, 2025).*
To the extent the sufficiency of evidence argument could be construed to be a suppression of evidence argument, it was waived by failing to present it below. Henry v. State, 2025 Ark. App. 174 (Mar. 19, 2025).*
“Herndon’s argument that her rights under the Fourth Amendment were violated when the superior court ‘commingled [her] private filings making it public’ is without merit. Herndon has no reasonable expectation of privacy in information that she voluntarily submitted to the government.” In re A Change of Name for Herndon, 2025 Alas. LEXIS 42 (Mar. 19, 2025).*
The officer was looking for a red Honda Civic and saw defendant in one as it passed him near the scene of the alleged crime. There was reasonable suspicion for the stop. “Looking at the totality of the circumstances here–the ‘whole picture’–if Richey was a ‘close question’ on reasonable suspicion, this case lands much closer to a slam dunk.” State v. Solom, 2025 Wisc. App. LEXIS 262 (Mar. 19, 2025).*
There are questions of fact as to both the justification for the stop and the use of force here. Summary judgment denied. Q.M. v. Cty. of L.A., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49466 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2025).*
2254 successor petition for a later probation search is barred. In re Barringer, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6358 (11th Cir. Mar. 18, 2025).*
While the stopping officer was filling out the citation, a second officer arrived. The dog sniff occurred while the citation was still being filled out, so it didn’t extend the stop. Grant of motion to suppress reversed. State v. Dean, 2025 Ga. App. LEXIS 143 (Mar. 19, 2025).
“Here, arresting officers relied on a series of facts connecting the Santander and Citibank Robberies to Mr. Brito. That some of those facts might have been innocuous when considered in isolation does not disturb this Court’s conclusion that the same facts, when considered together, established probable cause that Mr. Brito committed the Santander and Citibank Robberies, and thus established probable cause arrest Mr. Brito on November 30, 2023.” United States v. Brito, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49309 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2025).*
Defendant claims he innocently knocked on a door, but the occupant thought it was beating on the door and a burglary was about to happen and she called the police. There was reasonable suspicion when the police showed up and he was the only person there. “Even if Defendant was merely knocking on Wilson’s door as he contends, officers do not have to eliminate all innocent behaviors for there to be reasonable suspicion. … Given the totality of the circumstances, the Court finds that officers had reasonable suspicion to believe a crime was occurring and that Defendant was the person committing the crime.” United States v. Williams, No. 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49131 (E.D. Tenn. Mar. 18, 2025).*
The Spanish and English versions of a section of the Puerto Rico Weapons Law differ with “and” and “or” and reliance on whichever is objectively reasonable under Heien. United States v. Rosa-Ufred, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49334 (D.P.R. Mar. 14, 2025):
Siccing a police dog on a sleeping man not subject to qualified immunity. Luethje v. Kyle, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6385 (10th Cir. Mar. 19, 2025).
The CI’s information on a video showed his basis of knowledge and provided probable cause. State v. Hawkins, 2025 Ohio App. LEXIS 868 (5th Dist. Mar. 17, 2025).*
Warrantless arrest of a parole violator without a warrant doesn’t state a Fourth Amendment claim. Hobbs v. Mich. Parole Bd., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48768 (W.D. Mich. Mar. 18, 2025).*
The delay in getting a search warrant here was reasonable and justified by other investigative activities in this case, including a criminal complaint and a grand jury presentation. United States v. Witherspoon, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49040 (E.D. Ky. Jan. 29, 2025).*
by John Wesley Hall Criminal Defense Lawyer and Search and seizure law consultant Little Rock, Arkansas Contact: forhall @ aol.com / The Book www.johnwesleyhall.com
"If it was easy, everybody would be doing it. It isn't, and they don't." —Me
"Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but of playing a poor hand well." –Josh Billings (pseudonym of Henry Wheeler Shaw), Josh Billings on Ice, and Other Things (1868) (erroneously attributed to Robert Louis Stevenson, among others)
“I am still learning.” —Domenico Giuntalodi (but misattributed to Michelangelo Buonarroti (common phrase throughout 1500's)).
"Love work; hate mastery over others; and avoid intimacy with the government."
—Shemaya, in the Thalmud
"It is a pleasant world we live in, sir, a very pleasant world. There are bad people in it, Mr. Richard, but if there were no bad people, there would be no good lawyers."
—Charles Dickens, “The Old Curiosity Shop ... With a Frontispiece. From a Painting by Geo. Cattermole, Etc.” 255 (1848)
"A system of law that not only makes certain conduct criminal, but also lays down rules for the conduct of the authorities, often becomes complex in its application to individual cases, and will from time to time produce imperfect results, especially if one's attention is confined to the particular case at bar. Some criminals do go free because of the necessity of keeping government and its servants in their place. That is one of the costs of having and enforcing a Bill of Rights. This country is built on the assumption that the cost is worth paying, and that in the long run we are all both freer and safer if the Constitution is strictly enforced."
—Williams
v. Nix, 700 F. 2d 1164, 1173 (8th Cir. 1983) (Richard Sheppard Arnold,
J.), rev'd Nix v. Williams, 467 US. 431 (1984).
"The criminal goes free, if he must, but it is the law that sets him free. Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws,
or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence." —Mapp
v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 659 (1961).
"Any costs the exclusionary rule are costs imposed directly by the Fourth Amendment."
—Yale Kamisar, 86 Mich.L.Rev. 1, 36 n. 151 (1987).
"There have been powerful hydraulic pressures throughout our history that
bear heavily on the Court to water down constitutional guarantees and give the
police the upper hand. That hydraulic pressure has probably never been greater
than it is today."
— Terry
v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 39 (1968) (Douglas, J., dissenting).
"The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their
property."
—Entick
v. Carrington, 19 How.St.Tr. 1029, 1066, 95 Eng. Rep. 807 (C.P. 1765)
"It is a fair summary of history to say that the safeguards of liberty have
frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people. And
so, while we are concerned here with a shabby defrauder, we must deal with his
case in the context of what are really the great themes expressed by the Fourth
Amendment."
—United
States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56, 69 (1950) (Frankfurter, J., dissenting)
"The course of true law pertaining to searches and seizures, as enunciated
here, has not–to put it mildly–run smooth."
—Chapman
v. United States, 365 U.S. 610, 618 (1961) (Frankfurter, J., concurring).
"A search is a search, even if it happens to disclose nothing but the
bottom of a turntable."
—Arizona
v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 325 (1987)
"For the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly
exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth
Amendment protection. ... But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in
an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected."
—Katz
v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967)
“Experience should teach us to be most on guard to
protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born
to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded
rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men
of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.”
—United
States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1925) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)
“Liberty—the freedom from unwarranted
intrusion by government—is as easily lost through insistent nibbles by
government officials who seek to do their jobs too well as by those whose purpose
it is to oppress; the piranha can be as deadly as the shark.”
—United
States v. $124,570, 873 F.2d 1240, 1246 (9th Cir. 1989)
"You can't always get what you want / But if you try sometimes / You just might find / You get what you need." —Mick Jagger & Keith Richards, Let it Bleed (album, 1969)
"In Germany, they first came for the communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for
the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Catholic. Then they came
for me–and by that time there was nobody left to speak up."
—Martin Niemöller (1945) [he served seven years in a concentration
camp]
“You know, most men would get discouraged by now. Fortunately for you, I am not most men!” ---Pepé Le Pew
"The point of the Fourth Amendment, which often is not grasped by zealous officers, is not that it denies law enforcement the support of the usual inferences which reasonable men draw from evidence. Its protection consists in requiring that those inferences be drawn by a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being judged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime." —Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 13-14 (1948)
