Author Archives: Hall

WA: Mandatory UAs valid on supervision despite not being related to crime of conviction

Even though mandatory UA for drug and alcohol don’t directly relate to defendant’s crimes of conviction, there still is a compelling interest in the state being able to test. State v. Nelson, 2025 Wash. LEXIS 150 (Mar. 27, 2025). The … Continue reading

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Exclusionary rule, Probable cause | Comments Off on WA: Mandatory UAs valid on supervision despite not being related to crime of conviction

CA9: “[E]vidence of dominion and control provision” sought in this CP SW made it overbroad–withdrawn

The “evidence of dominion and control provision” sought in this child pornography search warrant made it overbroad. United States v. Holcomb, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 7135 (9th Cir. Mar. 27, 2025) (opinion withdrawn, new opinion to follow, United States v. … Continue reading

Posted in Overbreadth, Particularity | Comments Off on CA9: “[E]vidence of dominion and control provision” sought in this CP SW made it overbroad–withdrawn

Goldwater Institute: Search Warrants in the Digital Age: Supreme Court Should Look to the States

Goldwater Institute: Search Warrants in the Digital Age: Supreme Court Should Look to the States by Timothy Sandefur:

Posted in Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off on Goldwater Institute: Search Warrants in the Digital Age: Supreme Court Should Look to the States

W.D.Va.: No REP in non-legal jail mail from being scanned for tablet viewing

There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in non-legal mail in jail. Here, mail was scanned and made into a pdf for viewing on a tablet. Cecil v. Keller, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56313 (W.D. Va. Mar. 25, 2025).* A … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Mail and packages, Prison and jail searches, Probable cause | Comments Off on W.D.Va.: No REP in non-legal jail mail from being scanned for tablet viewing

E.D.La.: Def’s presence at another SW execution admissible under 404(b)

Defendant’s presence at a drug house when another search warrant was served is admissible under 404(b). United States v. Holmes, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55926 (E.D. La. Mar. 26, 2025).* Defendant’s performance on SFSTs was probable cause for his arrest … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Issue preclusion, Probable cause | Comments Off on E.D.La.: Def’s presence at another SW execution admissible under 404(b)

D.Ariz.: A cell phone tower dump of a two-hour span is not a “Fourth Amendment event”

A cell phone tower dump of a two-hour span is not a “Fourth Amendment event.” Even if it was, the good faith exception applies. United States v. Pricop, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55939 (D. Ariz. Mar. 25, 2025):

Posted in Cell phones | Comments Off on D.Ariz.: A cell phone tower dump of a two-hour span is not a “Fourth Amendment event”

MT: SW obviates implied consent for BAC test

The police having obtained a search warrant for defendant’s BAC, the implied consent statute doesn’t apply. State v. Clinkenbeard, 2025 MT 54 (Mar. 25, 2025). Defendant’s long standing drug trafficking was not stale. 2022 information was refreshed by 2023 information. … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Drug or alcohol testing, Independent source, Staleness, Waiver | Comments Off on MT: SW obviates implied consent for BAC test

D.Alaska: Motions in limine aren’t motions to suppress

Defendant filed a motion in limine in lieu of a motion to suppress which was otherwise out of time. A motion in limine isn’t a substitute for a motion to suppress. Nevertheless, the court goes to the merits of the … Continue reading

Posted in Collective knowledge, Motion to suppress, Qualified immunity, Standing | Comments Off on D.Alaska: Motions in limine aren’t motions to suppress

D.Kan.: § 1983 complaint questions state conviction and is barred by Heck

Plaintiff’s 242 paragraph § 1983 complaint calls into question his criminal conviction, so it’s barred by Heck. Turner v. Kansas Court of Appeals, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55052 (D. Kan. Mar. 25, 2025).* “Here, Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment unlawful imprisonment and … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Excessive force, Issue preclusion, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on D.Kan.: § 1983 complaint questions state conviction and is barred by Heck

MA: Weapon found in a Terry frisk can be seized

In a Terry frisk where a weapon is reasonably suspected, the officer has the authority to seize it until he knows what’s going on. Commonwealth v. Crowder, 2025 Mass. LEXIS 130 (Mar. 25, 2025):

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on MA: Weapon found in a Terry frisk can be seized

S.D.N.Y.:The fact that the Government intends to prove that the property belongs to Defendant does not establish standing

“The fact that the Government intends to prove that the property belongs to Defendant does not establish standing. See, United States v. Watson, 404 F.3d 163, 166 (2d Cir. 2005) (‘[D]efendant could not challenge the search of a residence merely … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Consent, Custody, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.:The fact that the Government intends to prove that the property belongs to Defendant does not establish standing

E.D.Pa.: Overnight guest had standing in the house but not the backyard

An overnight guest had standing in the house but not the backyard. United States v. Halley, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53342 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 24, 2025). Even if there was a false statement in the affidavit for search warrant, it … Continue reading

Posted in Attenuation, Franks doctrine, Standing, Unreasonable application / § 2254(d) | Comments Off on E.D.Pa.: Overnight guest had standing in the house but not the backyard

M.D.Ga.: Cell phone in car of drug dealer was seizable and searched with particular SW

Cell phone found in the car of one reasonably believed to be a drug dealer was searched by a warrant that was particular and with probable cause. United States v. Chambers, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53490 (M.D. Ga. Mar. 24, … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Particularity | Comments Off on M.D.Ga.: Cell phone in car of drug dealer was seizable and searched with particular SW

CA1: Omission of the CI’s criminal history was only negligent for Franks purposes

The affiant’s omission of the CI’s criminal history was only negligent and didn’t undermine the probable cause showing. United States v. Francis, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6795 (1st Cir. Mar. 24, 2025). Some of evidence here was discovered before any … Continue reading

Posted in Attenuation, Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA1: Omission of the CI’s criminal history was only negligent for Franks purposes

PA: Contents of a closed shoebox wasn’t in plain view

The contents of a closed shoebox were not in plain view. Commonwealth v. Herlth, 2025 PA Super 73, 2025 Pa. Super. LEXIS 138 (Mar. 24, 2025). “In sum, the evidence before the Court shows that the PGPD and the FBI … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Emergency / exigency, Overbreadth, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on PA: Contents of a closed shoebox wasn’t in plain view

N.D.Ga.: The immediately apparent prong of plain view requires PC

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 … Continue reading

Posted in Custody, Plain view, feel, smell, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on N.D.Ga.: The immediately apparent prong of plain view requires PC

CA9: 71-day delay for iPhone SW was reasonable where software update was involved

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. … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Plain view, feel, smell, Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA9: 71-day delay for iPhone SW was reasonable where software update was involved

Courthouse News Service: Obscurity shrouds state court rulings

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 in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Courthouse News Service: Obscurity shrouds state court rulings

S.D.W.Va.: Def’s agreement to let police see his firearm isn’t implied consent to enter his house

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 … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, 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

CO: Quantity of documents sought in SW doesn’t make it overbroad

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):

Posted in Overbreadth, Scope of search | Comments Off on CO: Quantity of documents sought in SW doesn’t make it overbroad