Category Archives: Admissibility of evidence

D.Mont.: FBI 302s not discoverable to aid in PC and particularity challenge

Defendant cannot get discovery of FBI 302s just to see if the search warrant was based on whatever information that would disclose. United States v. Purkey, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104824 (D. Mont. June 11, 2024). After all, the four … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Cell site location information, Motion to suppress, Particularity, Prison and jail searches, Warrant papers | Comments Off on D.Mont.: FBI 302s not discoverable to aid in PC and particularity challenge

MN: Jail call to delete Facebook pages because of incriminating information was PC for SW

Defendant told a person he called from jail to delete his Facebook accounts because of potentially incriminating evidence on it. The state showed probable cause and particularity for the Facebook warrant. State v. Sardina-Padilla, 2024 Minn. LEXIS 307 (June 12, … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Cell site location information, Probable cause, Social media warrants, Waiver | Comments Off on MN: Jail call to delete Facebook pages because of incriminating information was PC for SW

CA4: Alleged dirty cop involved in SW but not at trial wasn’t enough for new trial

An alleged dirty cop who didn’t testify at trial and was part of obtaining the search warrant was not enough to get a new trial. United States v. Banks, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 14273 (4th Cir. June 12, 2024). The … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Probable cause, Social media warrants | Comments Off on CA4: Alleged dirty cop involved in SW but not at trial wasn’t enough for new trial

TN: Redacted SW affidavit came in at trial by agreement; not plain error

The affidavit for a search warrant was redacted and admitted as evidence at trial by agreement. The issue was waived and is subject to plain error review, and it’s not plain error. Even if it was, it was harmless error … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Inventory, Waiver | Comments Off on TN: Redacted SW affidavit came in at trial by agreement; not plain error

CA4: Court instructing that the legality of searches were questions for the court wasn’t error

Defense counsel asked a question about something being in plain view which led to discussion of whether those words were an effort to challenge the search before the jury. The court instructed the jury that the legality of searches was … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Plain view, feel, smell, Reasonable suspicion, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on CA4: Court instructing that the legality of searches were questions for the court wasn’t error

MO: Collective knowledge for RS doesn’t require that every witness be called at the suppression hearing

Collective knowledge for reasonable suspicion doesn’t require that every witness be called at the suppression hearing. “While Appellant seemingly takes issue with the fact that the officer who took Victim’s report did not also testify, the Hensley test only requires … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Collective knowledge, Foreign searches, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on MO: Collective knowledge for RS doesn’t require that every witness be called at the suppression hearing

UT: Emergency aid exception permitted entry for apparent homicide victim who was missing

The emergency aid exception permitted entry into this murder scene. The victim was the grandmother of a child who punctually picked the child up every day at school. When she didn’t show for hours, the school notified police. They went … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Emergency / exigency, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on UT: Emergency aid exception permitted entry for apparent homicide victim who was missing

N.D.W.Va.: “[T]he purpose of a motion to suppress is not to challenge the sufficiency or admissibility of evidence.” That’s for a motion in limine

“[T]he purpose of a motion to suppress is not to challenge the sufficiency or admissibility of evidence. See U.S. v. Musgrave, 726 F. Supp. 1027 (W.D.N.C. 1989) (‘As the Government contends … evidentiary issues are better addressed at trial through … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on N.D.W.Va.: “[T]he purpose of a motion to suppress is not to challenge the sufficiency or admissibility of evidence.” That’s for a motion in limine

S.D.Cal.: Challenge to PC for revo warrant has to be made in the district where the warrant comes from

Challenge to the probable cause for a revocation warrant has to be made in the district issuing it, not this one where defendant currently resides. United States v. Carranza-Cruz, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31590 (S.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2024).* The … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Issue preclusion, Waiver | Comments Off on S.D.Cal.: Challenge to PC for revo warrant has to be made in the district where the warrant comes from

OH10: Taking GSR at scene of shooting was with exigent circumstances

Taking GSR samples from defendant at the scene of a potential murder was with exigent circumstances and wasn’t intrusive. “As in Jarrell, the GSR evidence was highly evanescent evidence that was susceptible to destruction from simple activities like wiping one’s … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Consent, Emergency / exigency | Comments Off on OH10: Taking GSR at scene of shooting was with exigent circumstances

VA: SW affidavit not admissible in a civil dispute where it contained multiple levels of hearsay

In a civil dispute over a condo, one party sought to use a search warrant affidavit as evidence, and they filed a motion in limine. The trial judge first denied it, then sua sponte granted it as the trial started. … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence | Comments Off on VA: SW affidavit not admissible in a civil dispute where it contained multiple levels of hearsay

Cal.4: No REP from images caught by streetlight camera

Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy from images taken on a street light camera where he parked his vehicle. Carpenter just doesn’t apply. Moreover, a store surveillance camera had him there, too. People v. Cartwright, 2024 Cal. App. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Pole cameras, Staleness | Comments Off on Cal.4: No REP from images caught by streetlight camera

CA11: Crew of foreign registered ship boarded in international waters has no 4A standing

Defendant had no Fourth Amendment standing when he was a foreign national on a ship of a foreign country that drew the Coast Guard’s attention south of the Cayman Islands. The Coast Guard finally boarded the ship after the country … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Consent, Foreign searches, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on CA11: Crew of foreign registered ship boarded in international waters has no 4A standing

KY: State could refer at trial to SW for DNA, but it couldn’t say def refused consent

It was not error to permit the state to inquire that a search warrant was used to get defendant’s DNA, as long as there was no reference to his refusal of consent. Finch v. Commonwealth, 2023 Ky. LEXIS 302 (Oct. … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Consent, Franks doctrine, Plain view, feel, smell, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on KY: State could refer at trial to SW for DNA, but it couldn’t say def refused consent

CA2: CP download 8 mo. before SW at least saved by GFE if no PC

A single download of child pornography eight months before the warrant was sought was at least supported by the good faith exception even if there wasn’t probable cause. United States v. Pratt, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 25977 (2d Cir. Oct. … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Good faith exception, Inevitable discovery, Probable cause, Staleness | Comments Off on CA2: CP download 8 mo. before SW at least saved by GFE if no PC

WV: Break in the chain of custody of DNA evidence taken after seizure is not a 4A violation

An after seizure alleged break in the chain of custody of DNA evidence taken is not a Fourth Amendment violation. Timothy C. v. Straughn, 2023 W. Va. LEXIS 339 (Sep. 15, 2023). Defendant’s LPN wasn’t visible until after the stop, … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Reasonable suspicion, Seizure | Comments Off on WV: Break in the chain of custody of DNA evidence taken after seizure is not a 4A violation

M.D.Ala.: Failure to back up CI made SW lack PC

Relying on a CI without backing him up failed to show probable cause. “With these guiding principles in mind, the undersigned concludes the search warrant affidavit here did not provide a substantial basis for finding probable cause to believe narcotics … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Informant hearsay, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on M.D.Ala.: Failure to back up CI made SW lack PC

GA: Refusal to consent to taking a DNA swab in a rape investigation is admissible at trial

Defendant’s refusal to consent to taking a DNA swab in a rape investigation is admissible at trial. Post-arrest cheek swabs do not violate the Fourth Amendment because they are accepted police booking and jailing procedures, similar to fingerprinting and photographing. … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, DNA, Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on GA: Refusal to consent to taking a DNA swab in a rape investigation is admissible at trial

W.D.Pa.: Lack of a proper chain of custody is not a ground for a motion to suppress

Alleged lack of a proper chain of custody is not a ground for a motion to suppress. United States v. Pollard, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88536 (W.D. Pa. May 19, 2023). Defendant’s Fourth Amendment issues on appeal are not the … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Consent, Motion to suppress, Waiver | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: Lack of a proper chain of custody is not a ground for a motion to suppress

D.S.C.: Lack of nexus to def isn’t grounds for motion to suppress; that’s a trial question

Lack of nexus between drugs and the defendant is an evidentiary question for trial, not a motion to suppress. The search is legal in any event. United States v. Cunningham, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43510 (D.S.C. Mar. 14, 2023). The … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Open fields, Seizure | Comments Off on D.S.C.: Lack of nexus to def isn’t grounds for motion to suppress; that’s a trial question