Category Archives: Issue preclusion

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

OH1: With legalization of marijuana, the smell of marijuana is no longer probable cause in itself

With legalization of marijuana, the smell of marijuana is no longer probable cause in itself. “While the smell of marijuana remains a relevant factor under the totality of the circumstances to a probable-cause analysis, it is no longer sufficient, standing … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Plain view, feel, smell, Probable cause | Comments Off on OH1: With legalization of marijuana, the smell of marijuana is no longer probable cause in itself

HI: Failure to include affidavit for SW in record precludes appellate review

Failure to include the affidavit for search warrant in the record precludes appellate review. As best the court can on the merits, defendant would lose anyway. State v. Bibbs, 2025 Haw. App. LEXIS 451 (Sep. 22, 2025). The search of … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Independent source, Issue preclusion, Probation / Parole search, Waiver | Comments Off on HI: Failure to include affidavit for SW in record precludes appellate review

D.D.C.: Arrest on outdated warrant doesn’t depend on its underlying validity

Plaintiff’s arrest on an outdated warrant doesn’t depend on the underlying validity of the warrant. Here, the warrant wasn’t purged from the system before plaintiff’s stop and arrest. Otero v. District of Columbia, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185918 (D.D.C. Sep. … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Issue preclusion, Prison and jail searches, Strip search | Comments Off on D.D.C.: Arrest on outdated warrant doesn’t depend on its underlying validity

CA7: No REP in an “out of order” restroom defendant slipped in to to hide a gun

Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in a convenience store bathroom where, calling attention to himself, he ducked inside to hide a gun and didn’t lock the door. United States v. Scott, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 22618 (7th Cir. … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Waiver | Comments Off on CA7: No REP in an “out of order” restroom defendant slipped in to to hide a gun

Six on habeas

Petitioner’s habeas claims include a Fourth Amendment claim barred by Stone. Steward v. Napoli, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169230 (S.D.N.Y. July 31, 2025).* Same: Bogan v. Christiansen, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 22218 (6th Cir. Aug. 27, 2025). The state court … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Issue preclusion, Unreasonable application / § 2254(d) | Comments Off on Six on habeas

Guam case shows: Don’t cross examine about the CI without a clear goal in mind

This started with a CI for a search warrant, but the hearing on the motion to suppress revealed there were actually three others. That information was outside the “four corners” but it cemented the probable cause. Guam v. Guerrero, 2025 … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on Guam case shows: Don’t cross examine about the CI without a clear goal in mind

VA: Dog repeatedly jumping onto the vehicle during the dog sniff was a search

The drug-sniffing dog’s repeatedly jumping onto and placing paws on a vehicle during a drug sniff constitutes a physical trespass for the purpose of obtaining information, and therefore qualifies as a search under the Fourth Amendment. Commonwealth v. Wiggins, 2025 … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion, Search, Trespass | Comments Off on VA: Dog repeatedly jumping onto the vehicle during the dog sniff was a search

MS: The CIs were co-conspirators and eyewitnesses and could be credited

The three informants were co-conspirators, eyewitnesses, and participants in the crime, and their information could be credited for search warrant. Taylor v. State, 2025 Miss. App. LEXIS 292 (Aug. 12, 2025). Defendant’s 2255 re-raises his Fourth Amendment claim already rejected. … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Excessive force, Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on MS: The CIs were co-conspirators and eyewitnesses and could be credited

W.D.N.Y.: No exigency shown for warrantless domestic entry

Based on the complaint, there were no exigent circumstances justifying the warrantless entry into the home for a domestic disturbance that had calmed way down before police got there. Intertwined is the qualified immunity claim, and there’s not enough here … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on W.D.N.Y.: No exigency shown for warrantless domestic entry

CA7: Lifting mattress during protective sweep here wasn’t justified

The protective sweep under a mattress here was unjustified. Protective sweeps have to be based on known facts, not theories. Here, without deciding whether it was justified, on this record, lifting a mattress was unreasonable. There was no reason to … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Issue preclusion, Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA7: Lifting mattress during protective sweep here wasn’t justified

CA8: Social media video of SW target shooting guns justified no-knock entry

Social media videos of a target of the warrant shooting guns viewed before obtaining the warrant justified a no-knock warrant. Davenport v. City of Little Rock, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 16540 (8th Cir. July 7, 2025). Plaintiff’s various claims, including … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Issue preclusion, Knock and announce | Comments Off on CA8: Social media video of SW target shooting guns justified no-knock entry

E.D.Wis.: Heck bar has to be pled in first defensive pleading

The Heck bar is an affirmative defense that has to be pled by defendants under F.R.C.P. 8(c). Megna v. Musial, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127980 (E.D. Wis. July 7, 2025). Defendant’s driving justified his stop. State v. Craven, 2025 Wash. … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters | Comments Off on E.D.Wis.: Heck bar has to be pled in first defensive pleading

N.D.Ill.: Particularity is a function of what’s known

“That said, specificity is ‘relative,’ and a warrant ‘need not be more specific than knowledge allows.’ United States v. Bishop, 910 F.3d 335, 338 (7th Cir. 2018). In other words, law enforcement is required to particularize a warrant only to … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Issue preclusion, Particularity, Standing | Comments Off on N.D.Ill.: Particularity is a function of what’s known