EMS responded to an overdose call, and they reported what they saw inside which led to police getting a search warrant. Leon v. State, 2026 Ind. App. LEXIS 171 (May 20, 2026).
“Missouri courts have indicated that the question of whether an arresting officer has reasonable grounds to believe that a person was driving a motor vehicle in an intoxicated condition — like the question of whether probable cause existed for an arrest — presents what is essentially a mixed question of law and fact. … Thus, appellate courts defer to the trial court’s role as trier of fact in resolving factual issues regarding the circumstances that led to the arrest; however, the ultimate question of whether an arresting officer had reasonable grounds to believe the person was driving a motor vehicle in an intoxicated condition based on a particular set of facts (as found by the trial court) presents a question of law that is reviewed de novo.” Olson v. Dir. of Revenue, 2026 Mo. App. LEXIS 389 n.4 (May 19, 2026).*
The Simmons rule of foregoing one constitutional right for another, there a Fourth and Fifth Amendment claim, doesn’t fit with a Sixth Amendment speedy trial claim. Wilcox v. State, 2026 Fla. LEXIS 810 (May 21, 2026).*
When the accused raises a mental health defense, he waives any reasonable expectation of privacy in the records. S.M. v. City of N.Y., 2026 NY Slip Op 03248, 2026 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3413 (1st Dept. May 21, 2026).*
“[T]he defendant admitted that he possessed a firearm stored in his dresser, and this admission formed the basis for probable cause for a search warrant.” People v. Novotny, 2026 NY Slip Op 03187 (2d Dept. May 20, 2026).*
Defendant’s Fourth Amendment and other ineffective assistance of counsel claims presented in a successor habeas are denied. Issues already raised and decided are waived. In re Gillis, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 14286 (11th Cir. May 18, 2026).*
It was reasonable to conclude that defendant driver of the car was the owner who was apparently “driving after being certified a habitual offender.” State v. Hobbs, 2026 N.H. LEXIS 91 (Apr. 7, 2026).*
When a likely Franks violation comes out at trial, defendant gets to reopen the suppression issue. Here, the officer’s false statement he was present for a third controlled buy satisfied Franks and was excised. Defense counsel showed that it couldn’t have happened. The remainder says two controlled buys, and these were found to be isolated transactions, the last was 20 days before the warrant issued. Because drugs dissipate relatively quickly, the warrant was stale when it issued. Suppression affirmed. Commonwealth v. Mallory, 106 Mass. App. Ct. 689 (Apr. 21, 2026).
Defendant’s claim the judge’s signature on the search warrant was forged is speculative and denied. No CoA. Crowe v. United States, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 14373 (6th Cir. May 19, 2026).*
The continuance of defendant’s stop was justified by the smell of marijuana which was not so improbable that there’s no probable cause. United States v. McIntyre, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 14366 (11th Cir. May 20, 2026).*
Defendant’s challenge to the search warrant for his cell phone records focused on one sentence adding nothing to the calculus. On the totality, the 8-page affidavit showed probable cause for the cell phone records. State v. Pinkerton, 2026 R.I. LEXIS 64 (May 19, 2026).*
Any extension of the stop was supported by reasonable suspicion. United States v. Rivera-Raposa, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 14241 (3d Cir. May 19, 2026).*
Defendant’s motion to suppress claiming there was no reasonable suspicion for a traffic stop for following a tractor-trailer too close is denied based on the officer’s testimony. United States v. Gilley, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111425 (W.D. Ark. May 20, 2026).*
Defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel allegation that failure to file a Fourth Amendment claim over a $362k firearm seizure is speculative and denied. United States v. Giambro, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111408 (D. Me. May 20, 2026).*
Plaintiff stated a claim for relief under the due process clause and Fourth Amendment for the City taking his 3-day-old son from his mother based on actions of her other boyfriends without any court order. He was three years getting reunited. K.W. v. City of N.Y., 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 14249 (2d Cir. May 19, 2026).*
Defendant’s computer wasn’t able to be searched within the 120-day window, so the government got an extension, which was valid. United States v. Tanjapatkul, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109830 (C.D. Cal. May 8, 2026).*
Defendant’s multiple Franks issues are rejected and don’t require a hearing. One was that another’s custodial statement was uncounseled, and another was that he was identified by a single photograph show up. But he already knew defendant. United States v. Drew, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109074 (W.D. Mo. May 18, 2026).*
The affidavit for search warrant gets a deferential standard of review by both the trial court and appellate court. Gaither v. State, 2026 Tex. App. LEXIS 4588 (Tex. App. – Houston (14th Dist.) May 19, 2026).
“The federal district court judge correctly concluded that the state judge issuing the warrant had probable cause. The application for that warrant established an adequate nexus between Deschambault’s suspected drug trafficking and the iPhone. Our conclusion turns on the fact that Deschambault’s drug trafficking was intimately related to his use of the iPhone: …” Drug deals were arranged on it, and it rang while he was being arrested in a car going to a drug deal. United States v. Deschambault, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 14151 (1st Cir. May 18, 2026).*
Defense counsel’s failure to question missing pole camera surveillance that was used in the search warrant application wasn’t ineffective assistance of counsel. United States v. Barksdale, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109754 (E.D. Pa. May 18, 2026).* [As in: How would it be helpful?]
Just because one officer sniffed defendant’s pipe and smelled tobacco, that didn’t mean other officers couldn’t sniff too and come to a different conclusion. United States v. Gearheart, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109593 (E.D. Cal. May 18, 2026).*
The odor of alcohol isn’t enough for a BAC warrant, but here there were more facts. State v. Vonduyke, 2026 Del. Super. LEXIS 215 (May 15, 2026).*
Defendant can’t seek return of property seized in 2019 that he agreed in the plea agreement to forfeit. United States v. Burkhow, 25-3002 (8th Cir. May 19, 2026).*
“Without needing to decide whether the Officers’ conduct constituted a constitutional violation, we conclude below that the law was not clearly established at the time of the Officers’ conduct.” Johnson v. Salter, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 14075 (5th Cir. May 15, 2026),*
The emergency disclosure requests (EDRs) for information about the 2022 allegedly racially motivated Tops grocery store shooting in Buffalo were valid. Officers were looking for potential co-conspirators. United States v. Gendron, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109541 (W.D.N.Y. May 18, 2026).
A take down during an arrest is not de minimis force. Young v. Keyes, 24-2763 (8th Cir. May 19, 2026).
Probable cause was shown for this search warrant in a juvenile weapons case. State v. D.T., 2026 Del. Fam. Ct. LEXIS 16 (May 5, 2026).*
Film cannisters in the door, even as a potential repository of drugs, wasn’t enough alone. When defendant moved them, however, reasonable suspicion developed. State v. Williams, 2026 Kan. App. LEXIS 19 (May 15, 2026).*
49 pounds of fentanyl suppressed because the stop was extended without reasonable suspicion. United States v. Salazar, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109153 (W.D. Okla. May 18, 2026):
Defendant was stopped and produced his DL, “surrender[ing]” it to the officer as required by law. He left on his own without it. That’s not an offense. Carter v. State, 2026 Nev. LEXIS 34 (May 14, 2026).
A prison strip search after court or a contact visit is reasonable. Starke v. Fuentes, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107471 (S.D.N.Y. May 13, 2026).*
A 911 call that somebody at a house had a gun brought three police officers who frisked the men outside. Defendant, as a visitor, still had a reasonable expectation of privacy in his own person, and this frisk was unreasonable and without reasonable suspicion. [The court also complains that it took four years from sentencing to the opinion on appeal and defendant did his time, not mentioning that this has an early 2023 case number. New York, take note.] People v. Sanders, 2026 IL App (1st) 230041, 2026 Ill. App. LEXIS 163 (May 15, 2026).*
The exclusionary rule only applies to constitutional violations, not statutory ones. State of Ohio/City of Or. v. Hendricks, 2026-Ohio-1796 (6th Dist. May 15, 2026).*
Under Stone, “The only relevant question for this federal habeas Court is whether Butler was given a chance to present his Fourth Amendment claim to the Ohio state courts. Butler filed a motion to suppress, and the trial court held an evidentiary hearing before denying the motion. Butler was not denied the opportunity to appeal. Butler was not denied an opportunity to present his claim in state courts and, as a result, Ground Three is not cognizable in federal habeas corpus review.” Butler v. Warden, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107995 (S.D. Ohio May 15, 2026).*
The witness was able to authenticate from photographs the drugs defendant discarded. United States v. Baker, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108442 (W.D. La. May 15, 2026).*
Claimant’s disclaimer in the money should have been decided first, not the merits of the search. It’s essentially a lack of standing. State ex rel. Kansas Highway Patrol v. $381,620 in U.S. Currency, 2026 Kan. LEXIS 125 (May 15, 2026).
The original cell phone warrant application was unsigned. Ultimately, trial court held that it couldn’t be used by either side at the trial, except for impeachment if necessary. People v. Zakrzewski, 2026 NY Slip Op 03029 (3d Dept. May 14, 2026).*
Even if partial suppression could have succeeded in this case [something doubtful], the remaining counts support the drug weight calculation. Antonio v. United States, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106688 (D.N.J. May 14, 2026).*
The stop was with reasonable suspicion based on collective knowledge, and the search warrant was based on valid informant hearsay. United States v. Graves, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106702 (S.D. Ind. May 14, 2026).*
In prison, “the visual strip search and the monitored bowel movement did not violate the Fourth Amendment.” McDonald v. Spears, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107383 (N.D. Fla. Apr. 6, 2026).
Defendant’s consent to search his cell phone was limited and narrow, and the officer’s 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).
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’t void the warrant. People v. Santa Clara Cty. Superior Court, 2026 Cal. App. LEXIS 298 (6th Dist. May 14, 2026).*
Immigration arrest warrants don’t 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).*
“To the extent that Plaintiffs’ claim is based on Defendant Pelham’s failure to conduct a more thorough investigation before seeking a warrant, it likewise fails. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants ‘failed to undertake minimally adequate investigative steps before seeking a warrant[.]’ … However, ‘[o]nce he has probable cause, an officer is not ordinarily required to continue to investigate or seek further corroboration.’ Ewing v. City of Stockton, 588 F.3d 1218, 1227 (9th Cir. 2009); U.S. v. Thoms, 2011 WL 87337, at *3 (D. Alaska 2011). …” Baker v. Pelham, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106636 (D. Ariz. May 14, 2026).
“Given the facts that the police officers smelled marijuana on Walker’s person, he had just exited his vehicle, and he admitted that there was weed and a gun in the car, the officers lawfully searched and impounded Walker’s vehicle for their safety and to safeguard any evidence that could be concealed or destroyed. We determine from this record that the trial court did not err when it denied Walker’s motion to suppress.” State v. Walker, 2026-Ohio-1767 (8th Dist. May 14, 2026).*
There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in non-legal jail calls. United States v. Mendoza, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106384 (M.D. Pa. May 14, 2026).*
Defendant was a friend of the family, and he came over to install an additional security camera inside the house. Later, that camera caught him sexually assaulting one of the girls. He had no reasonable expectation of privacy despite spending the night there on occasion, including this one. The recording didn’t violate the state eavesdropping statute. Baughcum v. State, 2026 Ga. App. LEXIS 239 (May 13, 2026).*
Continuing a knock-and-talk at a domestic disturbance and finally entering was all supported by exigency. Meyer v. State, 2026 Ind. App. LEXIS 162 (May 12, 2026).*
There is no confrontation right to cross-examine the CI who did the buy that led to the warrant who never testified at trial. United States v. Geer, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105511 (N.D. Ohio May 13, 2026).*
Defendant was seized when he was blocked by officers when he was walking, not just when he was taken down to the sidewalk. Greer v. United States, 2026 D.C. App. LEXIS 168 (May 14, 2026).
Defendant was stopped because his LPN was expired. Then the officer found his DL was also expired. The car was going to be towed, and the inventory was valid. Hinton v. Commonwealth, 2026 Va. App. LEXIS 276 (May 12, 2026).*
Defendant was handcuffed and in custody during execution of the search warrant for his place. His statements then were voluntary. United States v. Vélez, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105108 (D.P.R. May 8, 2026).*
Posted inCustody, Inventory, Seizure|Comments Off on DC: Def seized when blocked on sidewalk not just when taken down
"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]
“Children grow up thinking the adult world is ordered, rational, fit for purpose. It’s crap. Becoming a man is realising that it’s all rotten. Realising how to celebrate that rottenness, that’s freedom.” – John le Carré, The Night Manager (1993), line by Richard Roper
"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)
The book was dedicated in the first (1982) and sixth (2025) editions to Justin William Hall (1975-2025). He was three when this project started in 1978.
