Category Archives: Exclusionary rule

D.Colo.: Bank records have no REP so they can be obtained for restitution purposes

There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in bank records, and the government can obtain them to enforce a restitution order. United States v. Osborn, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90076 (D. Colo. May 23, 2023). Defendant doesn’t get a Franks … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Franks doctrine, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off on D.Colo.: Bank records have no REP so they can be obtained for restitution purposes

N.D.W.Va.: Checking on warrants of occupants of car reasonably extended the stop

Checking on the outstanding warrants on the occupants of the car reasonably extended the stop. United States v. Hamlet, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76568 (N.D. W.Va. May 2, 2023).* Presence of drugs in one’s car doesn’t make probable cause to … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on N.D.W.Va.: Checking on warrants of occupants of car reasonably extended the stop

N.D.W.Va.: Pulling open def’s pocket to search it was intentional and unreasonable; exclusionary rule applied

Pulling open defendant’s pocket to search it was intentional and required applying the exclusionary rule. United States v. Jenkins, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74739 (N.D. W.Va. Apr. 28, 2023). The close relationship between the participants supported probable cause. It was … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Exclusionary rule, Inventory, Probable cause | Comments Off on N.D.W.Va.: Pulling open def’s pocket to search it was intentional and unreasonable; exclusionary rule applied

E.D.Tenn.: Mislabeling SW attachments not worthy of exclusion

Accidental reverse numbering of Attachments A and B didn’t make the search warrant void. United States v. Deakins, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60866 (E.D. Tenn. Apr. 6, 2023).* Plaintiff’s claim that the Director of National Intelligence violates the Fourth Amendment … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, F.R.Crim.P. 41, Particularity, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on E.D.Tenn.: Mislabeling SW attachments not worthy of exclusion

CAAF: Cost of exclusion outweigh benefits, so no exclusion

In a sex assault case, assuming the search of defendant’s cell phone was unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment, the court concludes that the exclusionary rule should not be applied. M.R.E. 311. The error, if there was one, was the commanding … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on CAAF: Cost of exclusion outweigh benefits, so no exclusion

VA: Smell of MJ from one person in car is PC to that person only

When the smell of marijuana is localized to one person, that’s the extent of the probable cause. If from the car, it’s the car. King v. Commonwealth, 2023 Va. App. LEXIS 213 (Apr. 4, 2023) (unpublished). The video showed that … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Exclusionary rule, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on VA: Smell of MJ from one person in car is PC to that person only

S.D.N.Y.: The exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in § 1983 cases

The exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in § 1983 cases. Villafane v. City of N.Y., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52149 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 27, 2023). There was probable cause for the search warrant for defendant’s DNA. United States v. Burkhalter, 2023 U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Arrest or entry on arrest, DNA, Exclusionary rule, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: The exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in § 1983 cases

D.N.M.: Possession of a gun in car in Walmart parking lot wasn’t a crime and search for it under community caretaking function unreasonable

Police were called to a Walmart parking lot in Albuquerque because defendant was “unconscious” in his car in his car, and a gun was visible. The seizure of the gun and the interrogation surrounding it can’t be justified under the … Continue reading

Posted in Community caretaking function, Curtilage, Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on D.N.M.: Possession of a gun in car in Walmart parking lot wasn’t a crime and search for it under community caretaking function unreasonable

ID rejects “reasonable mistake of law” and Heien under state constitution; state’s exclusionary rule is broader

Idaho declines to adopt the “reasonable mistake of law” rule and suppresses a search incident to a warrantless arrest for a completed misdemeanor. The state’s exclusionary rule isn’t just to deter illegal police misconduct – it is considerably more, and … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Reasonableness, State constitution | Comments Off on ID rejects “reasonable mistake of law” and Heien under state constitution; state’s exclusionary rule is broader

CA6: Even if harassment was a basis to exclude a parole search, it wasn’t shown here

The exclusionary rule does not apply in supervised release revocation proceedings. Even if harassment by the officer was a basis to exclude, it wasn’t present here. United States v. Robinson, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 6756 (6th Cir. Mar. 21, 2023)* … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Custody, Exclusionary rule, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA6: Even if harassment was a basis to exclude a parole search, it wasn’t shown here

CA2: No REP shown in porch shared with neighbor

Defendant shared a porch with his neighbor and made no effort to show a reasonable expectation of privacy in it. United States v. Lewis, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 6689 (2d Cir. Mar. 21, 2023).* The exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Probable cause, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on CA2: No REP shown in porch shared with neighbor

KS: Excessive force in unnecessary stop by PIT maneuver led to death of passenger which is suppressed

Defendant refused to stop for a broken windshield infraction, and he fled. The officer PITted his car, and the passenger died. Defendant was charged with murder for the passenger’s death. The trial court held that the seizure resulting in the … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on KS: Excessive force in unnecessary stop by PIT maneuver led to death of passenger which is suppressed

CA: Unreasonable stop and running warrants revealed def was on parole; suspicionless parole search unreasonable

A man on the street was stopped by police for no apparent reason. A records check revealed he was on parole with a warrantless search waiver on file. The warrantless search of his person was unreasonable, and the exclusionary rule … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA: Unreasonable stop and running warrants revealed def was on parole; suspicionless parole search unreasonable

NE: Failure to deliver SW to def not 4A violation and doesn’t warrant suppression

Defendant was the subject of a search warrant for a blood draw. The fact he wasn’t given a copy of the warrant doesn’t require reversal. He clearly knew what was going on. State v. Svendgard, 31 Neb. App. 596, 2023 … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Exclusionary rule, Forfeiture, Warrant papers | Comments Off on NE: Failure to deliver SW to def not 4A violation and doesn’t warrant suppression

KY: 21-month delay for SW for cell phone not unreasonable where def in custody

Officers had probable cause and nexus and showed particularity to defendant’s cell phone. He’d previously been accused of recording undressed women and was involved in an upskirting. Here he’d been accused of sex with drugged women and recording some of … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Ineffective assistance, Inventory, Reasonableness | Comments Off on KY: 21-month delay for SW for cell phone not unreasonable where def in custody

S.D.Miss.: Even suppressed drugs can be figured into drug weight for sentencing

Even if a motion to suppress had been pursued and defendant prevailed, suppressed drug weight can be used at sentencing. United States v. Coleman, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10826 (S.D. Miss. Jan. 23, 2023). Pro se plaintiffs fail to state … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Nexus, Open fields | Comments Off on S.D.Miss.: Even suppressed drugs can be figured into drug weight for sentencing

AR: Claim state’s response to motion to suppress was judicial admission has to be presented to trial court

To argue that the state’s admissions in a response to a motion to suppress amount to a judicial admission of fact, the issue has to be argued to the trial court to preserve it. Otherwise, the trial court is free … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Burden of pleading, DNA, Exclusionary rule, Waiver | Comments Off on AR: Claim state’s response to motion to suppress was judicial admission has to be presented to trial court

CA6: Erroneous LEO database info still justified stop

Officers had information from the state DL and LPN database that defendant’s car had no insurance. That justified the stop even if it turned out to be erroneous. United States v. Conley, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 856 (6th Cir. Jan. … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Nexus, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA6: Erroneous LEO database info still justified stop

D.Minn.: Involuntary civil detainees in a sex offender program have no REP in their rooms

Involuntary civil detainees in a sex offender program have no reasonable expectation of privacy in their rooms. White v. Dayton, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71 (D. Minn. Jan. 3, 2023). Habeas petitioner’s claim that a bad photo ID led to … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Exclusionary rule, Issue preclusion, Prison and jail searches | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Involuntary civil detainees in a sex offender program have no REP in their rooms

OR: Computer hard drive with contraband could be destroyed with guilty plea

By defendant’s plea to a sex and child porn offense, the state could destroy the computer hard drives where the contraband was found. The seizure was in 2003, and the trial was 2017. State v. Forker, 323 Or. App. 323 … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Probation / Parole search, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on OR: Computer hard drive with contraband could be destroyed with guilty plea