Category Archives: Burden of pleading

CA2: GFE applies to particularity of SWs too

The good faith exception applies to particularity questions where the officer cannot reasonably be expected to question the scope of the warrant. United States v. Walker, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 11798 (2d Cir. May 15, 2023). “Given that a police … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Good faith exception, Particularity, Probable cause, Standing | Comments Off on CA2: GFE applies to particularity of SWs too

SD: Def not in custody during DNA SW when asked basic questions

Despite language difficulties, defendant did speak some English, enough to refer to erection difficulties, and he never indicated he didn’t understand. He was not in custody for Miranda purposes when he was asked some basic questions and volunteered information while … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Custody, Seizure | Comments Off on SD: Def not in custody during DNA SW when asked basic questions

MN: Purse in car could be searched under automobile exception

The warrantless search of defendant’s purse was lawful under the automobile exception because there was probable cause to believe that the car contained a controlled substance, and the purse was a container within that car. State v. Barrow, 2023 Minn. … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Burden of pleading, Cell phones, Good faith exception, Scope of search | Comments Off on MN: Purse in car could be searched under automobile exception

OH3: Def’s motion to determine legality of arrest never sought to suppress anything and wasn’t appealable

Defendant’s motion to determine the legality of his arrest was not even called a motion to suppress. It was not even appealable as it was framed. “[T]he motion filed by Sanchez on October 28, 2020, was not captioned a ‘motion … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Motion to suppress, Probation / Parole search, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on OH3: Def’s motion to determine legality of arrest never sought to suppress anything and wasn’t appealable

OH12: Fact LEO broke traffic laws to catch speeder isn’t a 4A reasonableness defense

The fact a police officer arguably broke traffic laws to effect a stop of a fleeing motorist isn’t a defense to a traffic stop under the Fourth Amendment or the state constitution. State v. Johnson, 2023-Ohio-1320, 2023 Ohio App. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Probable cause, Reasonableness | Comments Off on OH12: Fact LEO broke traffic laws to catch speeder isn’t a 4A reasonableness defense

C.D.Cal.: Mere seizure of a firearm not per se a 2A violation

“‘The mere occurrence of a firearm seizure during a traffic stop, however, is not enough to establish a Second Amendment violation. Police seize and confiscate firearms routinely, and this Court will not presume that each and every one of those … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness, Seizure | Comments Off on C.D.Cal.: Mere seizure of a firearm not per se a 2A violation

AR: Failure to argue against GFE below bars argument on appeal

Failure to challenge application of the good faith exception in the trial court on running the LPN through insurance database precludes challenging it on appeal. Erby v. State, 2023 Ark. App. 220, 2023 Ark. App. LEXIS 211 (April 12, 2023). … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Good faith exception, Standing, Waiver | Comments Off on AR: Failure to argue against GFE below bars argument on appeal

OH5: Admission of MJ but no MMJ card was PC

Admission there was marijuana in the car and nobody had a MMJ card was probable cause. State v. Hale, 2023-Ohio-1057, 2023 Ohio App. LEXIS 1025 (5th Dist. Mar. 30, 2023). A conclusory allegation that false information in an affidavit for … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Overseizure, Probable cause | Comments Off on OH5: Admission of MJ but no MMJ card was PC

WA: Stop to inquire of paying transit fare violated state constitution

Defendant’s freedom under the state constitution to not be interfered with in his private affairs was violated by a stop and inquiry whether he had paid a transit fare. He provided a false name that led to his prosecution for … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Qualified immunity, Seizure, State constitution | Comments Off on WA: Stop to inquire of paying transit fare violated state constitution

Cal.4: Without specific argument, court won’t look to SW and affidavit to make it for the appellant

Without specific argument, the court of appeals will not scour the record and the search warrant affidavit to make a party’s argument for him. Billauer v. Escobar-Eck, 2023 Cal. App. LEXIS 144 (4th Dist. Feb. 28, 2023) (anti-SLAPP case; not … Continue reading

Posted in Administrative search, Burden of pleading, Cell site location information, Good faith exception | Comments Off on Cal.4: Without specific argument, court won’t look to SW and affidavit to make it for the appellant

S.D.Ill.: When moving to suppress “data” one has to be specific

Defendant’s motion to suppress “data” and “associated data” fails because of his failure to show what and where it was or could be. (It kind of becomes a general motion to suppress.) United States v. Smith, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on S.D.Ill.: When moving to suppress “data” one has to be specific

AR: Claim state’s response to motion to suppress was judicial admission has to be presented to trial court

To argue that the state’s admissions in a response to a motion to suppress amount to a judicial admission of fact, the issue has to be argued to the trial court to preserve it. Otherwise, the trial court is free … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Burden of pleading, DNA, Exclusionary rule, Waiver | Comments Off on AR: Claim state’s response to motion to suppress was judicial admission has to be presented to trial court

IA: State failure to object to lack of Franks preliminary showing results in hearing, but def fails anyway

Defendant got a Franks hearing without an adequate showing, and the state didn’t object. So the court of appeals considers the showing at the hearing over the state’s objection, and defendant fails to show recklessness or intentional false statement or … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on IA: State failure to object to lack of Franks preliminary showing results in hearing, but def fails anyway

FL4: Suppression of arrest exceeded the relief def sought and is reversed

Defendant’s motion to suppress did not put the state on notice that he was seeking to suppress the result of his arrest. The trial court erred in granting that relief. State v. Bender, 2023 Fla. App. LEXIS 27 (Fla. 4th … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Burden of pleading | Comments Off on FL4: Suppression of arrest exceeded the relief def sought and is reversed

D.Minn.: All theories to suppress must be raised to USMJ on referral or it’s waived

Defendant’s storage unit had the doors and handles tested with Ion Scanning. He had no reasonable expectation of privacy in that. Before the USDJ, however, he raised it was a trespass to do it as the officers did. That’s waived … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Community caretaking function, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on D.Minn.: All theories to suppress must be raised to USMJ on referral or it’s waived

NY1: When state doesn’t challenge standing, it’s taken as conceded

When the state doesn’t challenge standing, it’s taken as conceded. The trial court thus erred in deciding standing. People v. Bonilla, 2022 NY Slip Op 07304, 2022 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7136 (1st Dept. Dec. 22, 2022). Defendant had his … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Standards of review | Comments Off on NY1: When state doesn’t challenge standing, it’s taken as conceded

OR: Even constitutional challenges need to be preserved below

Even constitutional challenges need to be preserved below. Jimenez v. Dep’t of Revenue, 370 Or. 543 (Dec. 15, 2022). The court does not find the officer’s testimony credible. He claimed he saw defendant with binoculars from 100′ away buying liquor … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on OR: Even constitutional challenges need to be preserved below

Cal.2: MJ smell associated with minors still RS for an offense

Officers ran an LPN and saw that the vehicle had expired tags. Driving next to the car, officers smelled burnt marijuana and knew that the users were minors which is still an offense under California law. That was cause for … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Inevitable discovery, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on Cal.2: MJ smell associated with minors still RS for an offense

IN: Mistake of law to an illegal search or seizure applies to the scope of the law, not whether it even exists

The mistake of law “defense” to an illegal search or seizure applies to the scope of the law, not whether it even exists. Here, it didn’t. White v. State, 2022 Ind. App. LEXIS 390 (Dec. 8, 2022). The specific characteristics … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Burden of proof, Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness | Comments Off on IN: Mistake of law to an illegal search or seizure applies to the scope of the law, not whether it even exists

SC: Exigency for CSLI was shooting victim left for dead and defendant was armed and dangerous

There was exigency for CSLI. “Thus, this was not a standard criminal investigation seeking cell phone data; rather, this request sought to address an ongoing emergency because Carter was potentially armed and dangerous, had been involved in a violent crime … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Burden of pleading, Cell site location information, Emergency / exigency, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on SC: Exigency for CSLI was shooting victim left for dead and defendant was armed and dangerous