Category Archives: Exclusionary rule

CA9: No REP in data in planted GPS device

Downloading data from a planted GPS device violated no reasonable expectation of privacy. McNeely v. Loeschner, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 9537 (9th Cir. Apr. 22, 2025). The facts of the planted device are below: McNeely v. City of Sparks, 2024 … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Exclusionary rule, GPS / Tracking Data, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on CA9: No REP in data in planted GPS device

CA4: No downward variance for 4A violation in revocation of supervised release

Defendant was on supervised release and revoked. No downward variance because the search violated the Fourth Amendment and led to dismissal of that separate case. United States v. Corbett, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 8758 (4th Cir. Apr. 14, 2025). “In … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Informant hearsay, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA4: No downward variance for 4A violation in revocation of supervised release

Cal.1st: Exclusionary rule doesn’t apply to DL suspensions

The exclusionary rule doesn’t apply to DL suspension proceedings. Kazelka v. Cal. Dep’t of Motor Vehicles, 2025 Cal. App. LEXIS 196 (1st Dist. Mar. 27, 2025). Officers responded to a shots fired call in a Bronx apartment and entered and … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Probable cause, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on Cal.1st: Exclusionary rule doesn’t apply to DL suspensions

WA: Mandatory UAs valid on supervision despite not being related to crime of conviction

Even though mandatory UA for drug and alcohol don’t directly relate to defendant’s crimes of conviction, there still is a compelling interest in the state being able to test. State v. Nelson, 2025 Wash. LEXIS 150 (Mar. 27, 2025). The … Continue reading

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Exclusionary rule, Probable cause | Comments Off on WA: Mandatory UAs valid on supervision despite not being related to crime of conviction

CA9: Failure to tell def of precise reason for arrest when no warrant in hand did not warrant suppression

Suppression of defendant’s statements is not warranted for FBI agents’ violation of Fed. R. Crim. P. 4(c)(3)(A), which provides that an arresting officer who does not possess a copy of the arrest warrant “must inform the defendant of the warrant’s … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Exclusionary rule, Foreign searches, Nexus, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA9: Failure to tell def of precise reason for arrest when no warrant in hand did not warrant suppression

TX2: Concurring opinion where SW wasn’t based on PC

A concurring opinion where there wasn’t probable cause for a search warrant, which is really hard to do these days: Staley v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 1523 (Tex. App. – Ft. Worth Mar. 6, 2025)*:

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Good faith exception, Probable cause | Comments Off on TX2: Concurring opinion where SW wasn’t based on PC

MO: GPS monitoring of a sex offender after release was reasonable

F.S.’s expectation of privacy is diminished as a convicted felon and registered sex offender, and the GPS monitoring’s intrusion on her privacy is slight. The state has a legitimate interest in protecting children and other potential victims from sex crimes. … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, GPS / Tracking Data, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on MO: GPS monitoring of a sex offender after release was reasonable

D.P.R.: Statement taken in violation of Miranda likely usable for impeachment

Defendant’s statement allegedly in violation of Miranda that the government doesn’t intend to use may be used for impeachment if the defendant contradicts them under Harris. United States v. Cardona, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22757 (D.P.R. Feb. 6, 2025). Inferences … Continue reading

Posted in Custody, Exclusionary rule, Probable cause | Comments Off on D.P.R.: Statement taken in violation of Miranda likely usable for impeachment

W.D.Wash.: No exclusion where alleged misconduct was not flagrant

Here, there was the intervening circumstance of an arrest warrant. There was also probable cause. United States v. Howell, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10557 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 21, 2025)*:

Posted in Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on W.D.Wash.: No exclusion where alleged misconduct was not flagrant

E.D.Pa.: Warrantless “emergency” entry without an emergency violated 4A but no suppression for isolated negligent act

Police did a “hit and hold” on defendant’s house without a warrant, a tactic reserved for emergencies. This was not, but it was an isolated act of negligence so the exclusionary rule will not be applied. United States v. Walker, … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on E.D.Pa.: Warrantless “emergency” entry without an emergency violated 4A but no suppression for isolated negligent act

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

PA: State failed in its burden of proof on inventory policy

The state failed to put on proof of the impoundment and inventory policy, so the trial court erred in finding it was reasonable. Commonwealth v. Brinson, 2024 PA Super 293, 2024 Pa. Super. LEXIS 536 (Dec. 9, 2024). Defendant’s car … Continue reading

Posted in Abandonment, Burden of proof, Exclusionary rule, Inventory, Standing | Comments Off on PA: State failed in its burden of proof on inventory policy

D.Mass.: Gun suppressed in FIPF case still not excludable in violation of supervised release

Defendant was an alleged felon in possession and was charged with a new federal crime and a violation of his supervised release. He was sentenced to 22 months on the violation. The gun was suppressed in the new gun case … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Exclusionary rule, Issue preclusion, Probation / Parole search, Voluntariness | Comments Off on D.Mass.: Gun suppressed in FIPF case still not excludable in violation of supervised release

IL: Arrest on recalled AW not suppressed where officers checked and rechecked it

Officers checked a law enforcement database and found an arrest warrant on defendant. They rechecked. Afterward, it turned out the warrant had been recalled but was still in the system due to a clerical error. The court will not suppress … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Good faith exception, Probable cause, Reasonableness | Comments Off on IL: Arrest on recalled AW not suppressed where officers checked and rechecked it

W.D.Wash.: Not applying exclusionary rule here would put all at risk of police excessive searches

“Here, the Court finds that the officers did not unreasonably extend the scope or duration of the stop. The officers were permitted to ask basic questions of Mr. Russell, including whether he had identification or whether he had any weapons … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on W.D.Wash.: Not applying exclusionary rule here would put all at risk of police excessive searches

TX12: Texas livestock officer lacked general law enforcement powers

A special ranger employed by the Texas & Southwest Cattle Raisers Association (TSCRA) recognized as part of the Texas DPS held himself out to be a law enforcement officer. Special rangers are limited to livestock and limited offenses. Instead, he … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Exclusionary rule, Ineffective assistance, Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness | Comments Off on TX12: Texas livestock officer lacked general law enforcement powers

Chronicle-Telegram: Elyria YWCA holds event to remember 4th Amendment pioneer Dollree Mapp

She’s an accidental pioneer. The Chronicle-Telegram: Elyria YWCA holds event to remember 4th Amendment pioneer Dollree Mapp by Richard Perrins (“The Elyria YWCA held an event Wednesday to teach about Dollree Mapp, a Cleveland woman whose Supreme Court case set … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on Chronicle-Telegram: Elyria YWCA holds event to remember 4th Amendment pioneer Dollree Mapp

WA state exclusionary rule is categorical, and a new crime alone isn’t enough for attenuation

The Washington State constitutional exclusionary rule is categorical and a privacy violation almost always results in exclusion. They had already rejected the good faith exception under state law. Here, it was attenuation, and a new crime alone isn’t enough. State … Continue reading

Posted in Attenuation, Exclusionary rule, State constitution | Comments Off on WA state exclusionary rule is categorical, and a new crime alone isn’t enough for attenuation

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

D.Idaho: The exclusionary rule does not apply in pretrial release revocations

The exclusionary rule does not apply in pretrial release revocations. Indeed, previously suppressed evidence can be considered on the factors for release. United States v. Cuevas, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185724 (D. Idaho Oct. 9, 2024). “Assuming without deciding that … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Exclusionary rule, Good faith exception | Comments Off on D.Idaho: The exclusionary rule does not apply in pretrial release revocations