Category Archives: Waiver

MI: Inventory policy doesn’t have to be written if it’s standardized

A written search inventory policy isn’t constitutionally required. “We hold that, in order to establish that an inventory search is reasonable, the prosecution must establish that an inventory-search policy existed, all police officers were required to follow the policy, the … Continue reading →

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Inventory, Issue preclusion, Unreasonable application / § 2254(d), Waiver | Comments Off on MI: Inventory policy doesn’t have to be written if it’s standardized

CA9: Changing argument from disputing facts of PC to facts don’t show PC is waiver

“Bruno changed his argument on appeal. In the district court, he disputed the government’s factual representations supporting the search of his apartment. On appeal, he no longer argues that the search warrant application contained factual inaccuracies or material omissions. Rather, … Continue reading →

Posted in Administrative search, Consent, Waiver | Comments Off on CA9: Changing argument from disputing facts of PC to facts don’t show PC is waiver

GA: 4A claim had to be raised at agency hearing level to preserve for appeal

Failure to object on Fourth Amendment grounds at the agency level before the zoning board in a zoning administrative case was waiver for appeal. Forsyth County v. Mommies Props. LLC, 2021 Ga. App. LEXIS 145 (Mar. 11, 2021). “The first … Continue reading →

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Burden of pleading, Probable cause, Waiver | Comments Off on GA: 4A claim had to be raised at agency hearing level to preserve for appeal

CA1: Breaking the excessive force claim into parts for analysis results in a denial of QI

The officers do not get qualified immunity in this 1983 case. “Certainly, this was not an ‘obvious case’ where the officers so blatantly violated the Fourth Amendment that recourse to factually analogous case law is unnecessary. Wesby, 138 S. Ct. … Continue reading →

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Qualified immunity, Waiver | Comments Off on CA1: Breaking the excessive force claim into parts for analysis results in a denial of QI

OH12: State’s “reasonable mistake of fact” justification for stop has to be raised in trial court first

The state didn’t rely on a “reasonable mistake of fact” justification for the stop in the trial court, so it can’t for appeal. State v. Turner, 2021-Ohio-541, 2021 Ohio App. LEXIS 564 (12th Dist. Mar. 1, 2021). Defendant had some … Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonableness, Waiver | Comments Off on OH12: State’s “reasonable mistake of fact” justification for stop has to be raised in trial court first

NE requires suppression issue be renewed when evidence admitted at trial

Failure to renew a suppression issue decided against you pretrial when the evidence is admitted is waiver in Nebraska. Besides, the issue on appeal would lose on the merits because the officer had reasonable suspicion for the stop and then … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of pleading, Cell site location information, Good faith exception, Waiver | Comments Off on NE requires suppression issue be renewed when evidence admitted at trial

D.D.C.: Voluntarily providing iPhone passcode during proffer not immune act

Defendant’s providing his iPhone passcode during his proffer session did not immunize the contents of the phone from the government’s use at trial. Kastigar hearing (a misnomer) denied. United States v. Otunyo, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30000 (D.D.C. Feb. 18, … Continue reading →

Posted in Privileges, Waiver | Comments Off on D.D.C.: Voluntarily providing iPhone passcode during proffer not immune act

CA10: De novo review overcomes a “skewed” finding of district court

Applying the Ornelas de novo review standard, the court reassesses the evidence and finds reasonable suspicion for the detention. The district court’s view of the evidence of reasonable suspicion was heavily skewed toward the government’s proof. Still, there is reasonable … Continue reading →

Posted in Standards of review, Waiver | Comments Off on CA10: De novo review overcomes a “skewed” finding of district court

CA11: Furtive gesture of hiding a cigarette pack was RS

The furtive gesture of hiding a cigarette pack during a traffic stop was reasonable suspicion (along with a few other reasons, but this is more important). United States v. Williams, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 3123 (11th Cir. Feb. 4, 2021). … Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Standards of review, Waiver | Comments Off on CA11: Furtive gesture of hiding a cigarette pack was RS

D.Mass.: Ptf stated claim for trespass for wrongful protective sweep in material witness arrest

Plaintiff stated a FTCA claim for trespass and intentional infliction of emotional distress for an alleged unjustified protective sweep entering his house to arrest him as a material witness in a military commission case. Gill v. United States, 2021 U.S. … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Waiver | Comments Off on D.Mass.: Ptf stated claim for trespass for wrongful protective sweep in material witness arrest

AR: Adding to PC argument on appeal wasn’t preserved

Defendant’s specific argument on appeal about the lack of probable cause was not presented to the trial court, so it’s not preserved for appeal. In a Franks part of the motion, the affidavit has to be read as a whole, … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on AR: Adding to PC argument on appeal wasn’t preserved

CA6: Def waived Franks argument on appeal by only arguing PC below

Defendant’s Franks argument on appeal fails because the motion to suppress was based on a lack of probable cause and didn’t direct the court to any alleged false statement under Franks. United States v. Baker, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 113 … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of pleading, Burden of proof, Franks doctrine, Waiver | Comments Off on CA6: Def waived Franks argument on appeal by only arguing PC below

D.V.I.: Not showing target a “particularized list” of things to be seized doesn’t justify exclusion

Failure to tell the target of a search warrant or his lawyer who showed up what’s being seized by showing the warrant itself doesn’t justify applying the exclusionary rule. The attachments incorporated into the affidavit were present at the scene … Continue reading →

Posted in Particularity, Waiver, Warrant execution | Comments Off on D.V.I.: Not showing target a “particularized list” of things to be seized doesn’t justify exclusion

W.D.Ky.: Corroboration of CI’s unique details supported CI’s reliability

“Here, the corroboration of unique details about where and how Daniels conducted drug transactions buttresses CS #2’s tip. The investigative measures taken by Detective Troutman make it probable that the informant was being truthful and gained his knowledge through access … Continue reading →

Posted in Informant hearsay, Waiver | Comments Off on W.D.Ky.: Corroboration of CI’s unique details supported CI’s reliability

OH2: Post-conviction 4A claim of lack of PC for SW fails for failure to include affidavit in record

Defendant’s post-conviction claim that defense counsel was ineffective for not challenging the validity of the search warrant in his case fails. He has to show he would have prevailed on the search issue, but the affidavit for the warrant isn’t … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of proof, Ineffective assistance, Waiver | Comments Off on OH2: Post-conviction 4A claim of lack of PC for SW fails for failure to include affidavit in record

D.Md.: Taking driver’s cell phone with DL during traffic stop unreasonably extended stop and violated 4A

Taking defendant’s cell phone with DL during a traffic stop unreasonably extended the stop and was in excess of the purpose of a traffic stop. United States v. Morganstern, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 240746 (D. Me. Dec. 22, 2020). A … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Community caretaking function, Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness, Waiver | Comments Off on D.Md.: Taking driver’s cell phone with DL during traffic stop unreasonably extended stop and violated 4A

N.D.Ohio: Lack of CI’s track record can be overlooked with corroboration of the story

The CI’s track record wasn’t disclosed but the corrobation was. Probable cause was shown. “Here, Detective Shelton’s affidavit established probable cause. Shelton’s affidavit relayed the informant’s statement that Defendant Butts was manufacturing Fentanyl tablets using Drug Mart brand pain medication. … Continue reading →

Posted in Informant hearsay, Waiver | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: Lack of CI’s track record can be overlooked with corroboration of the story

NY2: State couldn’t concede no PC in trial court but argue there was on appeal

The state conceded a lack of probable cause in the trial court when the automobile exception was at issue. On appeal, they argued against that concession, which they could not do. “Accordingly, the Supreme Court should not have denied the … Continue reading →

Posted in Waiver | Comments Off on NY2: State couldn’t concede no PC in trial court but argue there was on appeal

CA8 finds stop valid for grounds not relied on by Dist. Ct.

“The government defends the district court’s rationale, but argues alternatively that other facts independently provided reasonable suspicion to seize LaGrange in the restaurant parking area. We may affirm the district court’s denial of a motion to suppress on any ground … Continue reading →

Posted in Standards of review, Waiver | Comments Off on CA8 finds stop valid for grounds not relied on by Dist. Ct.

CA11: Even if warrantless monitoring of a package in def’s home violated 4A, inevitable discovery applies

Even if warrantless monitoring of a package into defendant’s house violated the Fourth Amendment, inevitable discovery applies. There was an intensive investigation and time was of the essence. The exclusionary rule should not be applied. United States v. Watkins, 2020 … Continue reading →

Posted in GPS / Tracking Data, Knock and talk, Mail and packages, Waiver | Comments Off on CA11: Even if warrantless monitoring of a package in def’s home violated 4A, inevitable discovery applies