Category Archives: Warrant papers

W.D.Pa.: Def doesn’t overcome common law presumption SW records are public records

Defendant objects to the search warrant materials being unsealed on the docket. He has not overcome the common law presumption of open access. The First Amendment right of public access is even broader. These papers are unsealed. United States v. … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Strip search, Warrant papers | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: Def doesn’t overcome common law presumption SW records are public records

KS: In responding to SW, out-of-state social media company’s authentication statement substantially complied with state law

In responding to a search warrant request, the social media company provided Rule 901 authentication for that state “under penalty of perjury,” but under the law of the United States not the State of Kansas. It was under penalty of … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of proof, Pretext, Warrant execution, Warrant papers | Comments Off on KS: In responding to SW, out-of-state social media company’s authentication statement substantially complied with state law

W.D.Ky.: Police battering ram to door and shots fired inside is a seizure

In the Brianna Taylor civil rights prosecution, the battering ram to the door of the apartment with shots being fired was a seizure of the occupants. United States v. Hankison, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29347 (W.D. Ky. Feb. 19, 2025).* … Continue reading →

Posted in Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Seizure, Standing, Warrant papers | Comments Off on W.D.Ky.: Police battering ram to door and shots fired inside is a seizure

CA9: 4A does not require the recording of telephonic oaths

The Fourth Amendment does not require the recording of telephonic oaths. United States v. Larkins, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 3513 (9th Cir. Feb. 14, 2025). The officer’s conduct was not reckless or deliberate to avoid the good faith exception. United … Continue reading →

Posted in Good faith exception, Ineffective assistance, Warrant papers | Comments Off on CA9: 4A does not require the recording of telephonic oaths

AR: “[T]he exclusionary rule—absent a showing of bad faith—does not apply in a revocation hearing.”

“[T]he exclusionary rule—absent a showing of bad faith—does not apply in a revocation hearing.” Wallace v. State, 2025 Ark. App. 19 (Jan. 15, 2025). An officer on patrol in a motel parking lot saw defendant’s car. They drove past each … Continue reading →

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Probation / Parole search, Warrant papers | Comments Off on AR: “[T]he exclusionary rule—absent a showing of bad faith—does not apply in a revocation hearing.”

CA1: SW was in good faith where affidavit was accidentally not filed with court

The Postal Inspector here prepared the search warrant affidavit, and the affidavit was to be incorporated with the warrant. The warrant was filed, however, by the USAO without the affidavit attached. The good faith exception applies. The officer did nothing … Continue reading →

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Good faith exception, Warrant papers | Comments Off on CA1: SW was in good faith where affidavit was accidentally not filed with court

S.D.Ala.: Failure to timely make SW return under state law not a 4A issue

The fact the search warrant paperwork wasn’t returned on time which made it void under state law isn’t relevant under the Fourth Amendment in federal court. Jackson v. United States, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 235912 (S.D. Ala. Dec. 4, 2024), … Continue reading →

Posted in Excessive force, Reasonableness, Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Unreasonable application / § 2254(d), Warrant papers | Comments Off on S.D.Ala.: Failure to timely make SW return under state law not a 4A issue

W.D.N.Y.: Incorrect AUSA assertion about which phone was searched had to be promptly clarified, not when he or she felt like it

Here, the AUSA was apparently confused in pleadings as to which cell phone was searched, a white or black one. When the AUSA learned that the wrong one was spoken of, he or she had a duty to promptly clarify–not … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of pleading, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver, Warrant papers | Comments Off on W.D.N.Y.: Incorrect AUSA assertion about which phone was searched had to be promptly clarified, not when he or she felt like it

NV: No suppression for a delayed return of SW

State law says that the product of search warrants can be suppressed when they were wrongfully executed. That says nothing about a delayed return, and the search won’t be suppressed for that reason. Alvarez v. State, 2024 Nev. LEXIS 69 … Continue reading →

Posted in Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Warrant execution, Warrant papers | Comments Off on NV: No suppression for a delayed return of SW

NY3: No REP in SHU surveillance

Defendant was in a special housing unit in a NY state prison. He knew he was under constant surveillance. He had no reasonable expectation of privacy in admissions he made caught on video. People v. Ashcroft, 2024 NY Slip Op … Continue reading →

Posted in Excessive force, Prison and jail searches, Surveillance technology, Warrant papers | Comments Off on NY3: No REP in SHU surveillance

E.D.Wis.: Ptf’s claim judge’s signature on SW was forged fails for not even alleging there was a search

“The plaintiff similarly alleges that Miller forged a judge’s signature on a search warrant. But he does not say anything else about this search warrant. Did law enforcement execute the search warrant? What, or where, did they search? Did they … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Plain view, feel, smell, Warrant papers | Comments Off on E.D.Wis.: Ptf’s claim judge’s signature on SW was forged fails for not even alleging there was a search

OH12: Stop for riding bicycle in center of road led to RS for frisk

Defendant’s stop was for riding a bicycle in the center of the road, but when finally stopped, he had a large sheathed knife on him, and that justified a frisk. State v. Hayes, 2024-Ohio-5545 (12th Dist. Nov. 25, 2024).* “Defendant … Continue reading →

Posted in Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion, Warrant papers | Comments Off on OH12: Stop for riding bicycle in center of road led to RS for frisk

CA6: Defense counsel not ineffective for not forecasting Carpenter three years early

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not forecasting Carpenter years before it was decided. Cooper v. United States, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 29853 (6th Cir. Nov. 22, 2024).* Defendant was on parole for a child exploitation offense, and he was polygraphed … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell site location information, Ineffective assistance, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion, Warrant papers | Comments Off on CA6: Defense counsel not ineffective for not forecasting Carpenter three years early

OH3: Even where the SW return was overlooked for a year, no exclusion

The state violated its rule 41 because the return was a year late. The exclusionary rule applies to constitutional violations, not rule violations, and the trial court erred in fashioning its own exclusionary rule here. State v. Nevels, 2024-Ohio-4964, 2024 … Continue reading →

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Probable cause, Probation / Parole search, Warrant papers | Comments Off on OH3: Even where the SW return was overlooked for a year, no exclusion

E.D.Pa.: SW papers remain sealed because the investigation isn’t complete

The government opposes the unsealing of the search warrant papers in this case because the investigation is still ongoing. The first motion was denied about a year ago. On renewal of the motion, the court finds the investigation still ongoing, … Continue reading →

Posted in Probable cause, Warrant papers | Comments Off on E.D.Pa.: SW papers remain sealed because the investigation isn’t complete

W.D.Wash.: When a document is discussed in a SW affidavit, including the document isn’t required

When a written document is involved and discussed in a search warrant affidavit, including the document is not constitutionally required. Misstating it might make a Franks claim. United States v. Shetty, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161863 (W.D. Wash. Sep. 9, … Continue reading →

Posted in Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Warrant papers | Comments Off on W.D.Wash.: When a document is discussed in a SW affidavit, including the document isn’t required

D.S.D.: Misidentifying cell phone make in SW no error where number and pass code were correct

Misidentifying defendant’s cell phone for a search warrant as a Motorola when it was a Samsung is a mistake that can be overlooked. It had the phone number in the warrant and defendant’s pass code opened it. Finally, the good … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Prison and jail searches, Reasonableness, Waiver, Warrant papers | Comments Off on D.S.D.: Misidentifying cell phone make in SW no error where number and pass code were correct

S.D.Ind.: Handwritten alterations to SW were authorized by issuing magistrate and were valid

Handwritten alterations on the search warrant to match the same subjects as the affidavit were authorized by the issuing magistrate and were valid. And, even if this made it overbroad, it was still valid under the good faith exception. United … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Attenuation, Good faith exception, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Search incident, Warrant papers | Comments Off on S.D.Ind.: Handwritten alterations to SW were authorized by issuing magistrate and were valid

CA7: SW affiant doesn’t have to explore all of def’s possible defenses in affidavit

When the affiant officer establishes probable cause for a search warrant, he or she isn’t required to explore all the defenses or affirmative defenses the search target may have to put in the affidavit. Here, this arose in the context … Continue reading →

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Privileges, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Warrant papers | Comments Off on CA7: SW affiant doesn’t have to explore all of def’s possible defenses in affidavit

LA2: SI before arrest was still valid

Defendant was stopped for aggravated assault from allegedly waving a gun. The search incident of his bag for a gun was reasonable as a search incident even though it preceded the arrest. State v. Gipson, 2024 La. App. LEXIS 1382 … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Protective sweep, Search incident, Warrant papers | Comments Off on LA2: SI before arrest was still valid