Category Archives: Issue preclusion

ID: Time on seized video was erroneous and it was within particularity of SW

The search warrant for a GoPro video was valid based on the time of the search shown on the video being erroneous. Practical accuracy is the touchstone, and the correct time could be reconstructed. The warrant was particular. State v. … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Particularity, Seizure | Comments Off on ID: Time on seized video was erroneous and it was within particularity of SW

OH5: Ohio recognizes Groh incorporation by reference for particularity

Ohio recognizes Groh incorporation by reference for particularity. State v. Starcher, 2026-Ohio-15, 2026 Ohio App. LEXIS 11 (5th Dist. Jan. 6, 2026). In a civil case, the reference to Fourth Amendment was a typo for Fourteenth. It will be considered … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Particularity | Comments Off on OH5: Ohio recognizes Groh incorporation by reference for particularity

D.N.J.: Someone doesn’t have to be home to execute a SW

It isn’t a proper Fourth Amendment challenge for a warrant not to be executed because no one is home. Rodriguez-Ferreira v. Sweeney, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 560 (D.N.J. Jan. 5, 2026). Defense counsel objected to the search warrant twice on … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Unreasonable application / § 2254(d), Warrant execution | Comments Off on D.N.J.: Someone doesn’t have to be home to execute a SW

KY: Def needs to make a record on how long the drug dog extended the stop under Rodriguez

The drug dog arrived while the traffic tickets were still being written. All the record shows is that. The record doesn’t “reveal how much time elapsed between the canine’s arrival and it alerting to the odor of unlawful drugs emanating … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Dog sniff, Issue preclusion, Privileges | Comments Off on KY: Def needs to make a record on how long the drug dog extended the stop under Rodriguez

CA9: Evidence seized by state not taken or used by feds not subject to Rule 41(g)

State officers seized defendant’s Rolex watch in a search, and there was a federal prosecution, but the watch was never part of it nor evidence of anything. Thus, Rule 41(g) affords him no relief here. There’s no constructive federal possession … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Nexus, Prison and jail searches, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on CA9: Evidence seized by state not taken or used by feds not subject to Rule 41(g)

LA2: Posse Comitatus Act has nothing to do with a vehicle accident

The Posse Comitatus Act has nothing to do with a vehicle accident with the Arkansas National Guard returning to Arkansas after helping with cleanup after Hurricane Ida. Bowman v. Williams, 2025 La. App. LEXIS 2333 (La App. 2 Cir. Dec. … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on LA2: Posse Comitatus Act has nothing to do with a vehicle accident

E.D.Mo.: Neither RS nor PC required for electronics search at border

Neither reasonable suspicion or probable cause is required for a border search of electronic equipment. Here, it was at Newark airport. United States v. Bill, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 234680 (E.D. Mo. Dec. 2, 2025). Defendant who had 19 prior … Continue reading

Posted in Border search, Cell phones, Computer and cloud searches, Issue preclusion, Seizure, Voluntariness | Comments Off on E.D.Mo.: Neither RS nor PC required for electronics search at border

MT: Losing 4A claim on post-conviction is collateral estoppel in legal malpractice action

Losing a Fourth Amendment claim on post-conviction is collateral estoppel in a legal malpractice action. Benton v. Babcock, 2025 MT 277, 2025 Mont. LEXIS 1461 (Dec. 2, 2025). “The search warrant application contained sufficient information to support a reasonable belief … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Issue preclusion, Probable cause | Comments Off on MT: Losing 4A claim on post-conviction is collateral estoppel in legal malpractice action

S.D.Cal.: ICE detention of asylum claimant was without PC and due process and it’s unrebutted

Petitioner is an Iranian national here under a claim of asylum. He was arrested and detained by ICE agents on the street. His Fourth Amendment and due process claims over his detention are unrebutted by the government and taken as … Continue reading

Posted in DNA, Immigration arrests, Inventory, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on S.D.Cal.: ICE detention of asylum claimant was without PC and due process and it’s unrebutted

Five on habeas

The district court granted a limited CoA in this 2254 appeal. Petitioner doesn’t get to expand it to a consensual recording issue [that is frivolous]. Sontay v. Heidle, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 30613 (6th Cir. Nov. 21, 2025).* 2241 petitioner’s … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion | Comments Off on Five on habeas

E.D.N.Y.: SW for cell phone at border after warrantless search was reasonable

CBP seized and searched defendant’s cell phones at the border under existing authority. After subsequent case law called that into question, the government sought a search warrant for the phones disclosing all the facts. The subsequent warrant was valid. United … Continue reading

Posted in Border search, Cell phones, Excessive force, Issue preclusion, Seizure | Comments Off on E.D.N.Y.: SW for cell phone at border after warrantless search was reasonable

FL4: Welfare check not unreasonable just because a crime might also be involved

A 911 call about a potential impaired driver with kids in the car justified the officer’s interaction with the defendant. A welfare community caretaking check isn’t unreasonable just because it’s intertwined with a potential crime. Children can’t be expected to … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on FL4: Welfare check not unreasonable just because a crime might also be involved

E.D.Cal.: A cell phone number in SW papers isn’t reason to seal them

The government doesn’t provide justification for sealing this search warrant application merely because there are cell phone number in it. It is presumptively a public record. In re Matter of Application by United States for Search Warrant to Search, 2025 … Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, Issue preclusion, Warrant papers | Comments Off on E.D.Cal.: A cell phone number in SW papers isn’t reason to seal them

MS: Forensic search of computer in a county other than where SW was served violates no law

The fact a forensic search of defendant’s computer was done in a county other than where the search warrant for its seizure was executed doesn’t violate any law. Fields v. State, 2025 Miss. App. LEXIS 430 (Nov. 4, 2025). The … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Issue preclusion, Voluntariness | Comments Off on MS: Forensic search of computer in a county other than where SW was served violates no law

D.P.R.: No suppression hearing required when there’s no factual dispute

You don’t get a hearing on a motion to suppress without showing a factual dispute to be resolved. United States v. Figueroa-Figueroa, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218467 (D.P.R. Nov. 4, 2025). “A claim that a law enforcement official used excessive … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Issue preclusion, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on D.P.R.: No suppression hearing required when there’s no factual dispute

D.N.M.: SW nondisclosure order denied for lack of supervisor certification

In re Application for AT&T Non-Disclosure Order, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218179 (D.N.M. Nov. 4, 2025), is denied for lack of certification from a supervising official as required by statute. Defendant was subject to a probation search waiver, and there … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Nondisclosure order, Probable cause, Probation / Parole search, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on D.N.M.: SW nondisclosure order denied for lack of supervisor certification

CA6: Applying PC deference, there was PC for this warrant based on informant hearsay

“Applying this deference here, we conclude that the state judge properly found probable cause based on the informant’s claims that Howard stored illegal drugs at his apartment. The officer’s affidavit adequately established the informant’s reliability and basis of knowledge. First, … Continue reading

Posted in Cell site location information, Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on CA6: Applying PC deference, there was PC for this warrant based on informant hearsay

W.D.Tex.: Frequency of cell searches not a 4A claim

“Plaintiff complains of cell searches that are unscheduled or more frequent than she believes they should be. Such a claim does not state a constitutional violation. Even assuming that TDCJ policy dictates the frequency of searches, additional searches are not … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Prison and jail searches, Reasonable suspicion, Seizure | Comments Off on W.D.Tex.: Frequency of cell searches not a 4A claim

C.D.Cal.: Private case subpoenas not 4A issue

A private party issuing subpoenas in a civil case is not subject to the Fourth Amendment. Rodney v. TransUnion LLC., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 211570 (C.D. Cal. Sep. 2, 2025). This Walmart store’s asset protection person was considered a reliable … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters | Comments Off on C.D.Cal.: Private case subpoenas not 4A issue

CA8: While the nexus showing was weak, GFE still applied

This affidavit for search warrant didn’t show nexus, but it wasn’t so lacking that the good faith exception didn’t apply. Some information was provided, and it was more than in cases where it was lacking. United States v. Diaz, 2025 … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Independent source, Issue preclusion, Nexus, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA8: While the nexus showing was weak, GFE still applied