Category Archives: Exclusionary rule

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

CA10: State officers investigating murder on an Indian reservation without jurisdiction does not lead to suppression of evidence

State law enforcement officers investigated a murder on the Muscogee Creek Reservation which at the time was not necessarily legal but two years later was not. The murder was prosecuted in federal court. There is no dispute the officers lacked … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Reasonableness | Comments Off on CA10: State officers investigating murder on an Indian reservation without jurisdiction does not lead to suppression of evidence

CT: Exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in civil cases, here one over animal neglect

The exclusionary rule doesn’t apply to civil cases, here an action over who gets possession of neglected animals. State ex rel. Dunn v. Connelly, 2024 Conn. App. LEXIS 268 (Oct. 8, 2024). This is a DUI on federal property. Even … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Reasonableness | Comments Off on CT: Exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in civil cases, here one over animal neglect

CO: Unlawfully obtained cell phone PIN used to search phone required suppression

The police unlawfully obtained defendant’s cell phone’s 6-digit PIN number to access his phone after a failed “brute force attack” attempting to get into the phone. That required suppression of the cell phone. People v. d’Estree, 2024 COA 106, 2024 … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on CO: Unlawfully obtained cell phone PIN used to search phone required suppression

CA6: New evidence of possible Franks violation for successor habeas not adequate to possibly alter outcome

2255 petitioner’s successor petition claims newly discovered evidence from an FOIA response that casts doubt on the affidavit for the search warrant obtained in 2011. “So Duval has not shown that the search warrant affidavit contained a false statement. Nor … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on CA6: New evidence of possible Franks violation for successor habeas not adequate to possibly alter outcome

AK: Exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in civil cases

The exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in civil cases in Alaska. Alaska R.E. 412. O’Brien v. Delaplain, 2024 Alas. LEXIS 99 n.35(Sep. 27, 2024). The officer’s observations on a table near the door from outside the dwelling during a knock-and-talk provided … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Exclusionary rule, Knock and talk, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on AK: Exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in civil cases

OR: Exclusionary rule doesn’t apply to criminally dangerous person civil commitments

Neither the state nor federal exclusionary rule does not apply in criminal dangerous person civil commitments. State v. T.L.B. (In re T.L.B.), 335 Or. App. 225 (Sep. 25, 2024). The officer here saw defendant walking at night in a neighborhood … Continue reading

Posted in Abandonment, Consent, Exclusionary rule, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on OR: Exclusionary rule doesn’t apply to criminally dangerous person civil commitments

PA: The Rule of Law here counsels against suppression for a jurisdictional violation

A stop outside the officer’s jurisdiction in violation of statute should not lead to suppression of evidence. The rule of law counsels against suppression. The jurisdictional statutes are for accountabiliy. Commonwealth v. Eakin, 2024 PA Super 222, 2024 Pa. Super. … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on PA: The Rule of Law here counsels against suppression for a jurisdictional violation

D.Conn.: LEO accessing public social media accounts doesn’t implicate 4A

A prison security official’s accessing a potential visitor’s social media accounts to determine whether the visitor is some kind of security threat doesn’t violate the Fourth Amendment. Lawrence v. Zack, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161377 (D. Conn. Sep. 9, 2024). … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Exclusionary rule, Issue preclusion, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Social media warrants | Comments Off on D.Conn.: LEO accessing public social media accounts doesn’t implicate 4A

D.N.J.: Fictitious tags stop justifies SI

Based on circuit authority, a stop and arrest for fictitious tags justifies a search incident on the driver. United States v. Jones, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161352 (E.D. Wis. Sep. 9, 2024), quoting United States v. Travis, 2023 U.S. App. … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Reasonable suspicion, Search incident, Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off on D.N.J.: Fictitious tags stop justifies SI

MA: Investigative equal protection claim can be enforced by DA’s discovery failure

Defendant raised an equal protection claim about discovery of ShapChat search warrants. Defense counsel stated that an informal survey of defense lawyers handling about 1/4th of the cases in Suffolk County showed that 85% of the warrants were against black … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Privileges, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on MA: Investigative equal protection claim can be enforced by DA’s discovery failure

M.D.Ala.: Under Evans, DV OP justified stop that led to inventory even though it had unknowingly been set aside

The officer reasonably relied on a report from dispatch that defendant had a DV order of protection against him by his wife. After the stop and the inventory for towing his car, his estranged wife showed up with a copy … Continue reading

Posted in Border search, Cell phones, Consent, Exclusionary rule, Good faith exception | Comments Off on M.D.Ala.: Under Evans, DV OP justified stop that led to inventory even though it had unknowingly been set aside

NM: Def’s new crime after arrest not to be excluded

“We agree with the Court of Appeals that the new crime exception to the exclusionary rule applies and we agree with its analysis of the issue. The exclusionary rule applies only where its deterrence benefits outweigh its societal costs. Strieff, … Continue reading

Posted in Attenuation, Exclusionary rule, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on NM: Def’s new crime after arrest not to be excluded

HI: Failure to litigate application of Posse Commitatus Act was IAC under state law

Defense counsel was ineffective for not raising the Posse Comitatus Act where his offense was just outside the Pearl Harbor base and the military was the first to respond. Other courts disagree, but the state exclusionary rule shows that there … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Exclusionary rule, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on HI: Failure to litigate application of Posse Commitatus Act was IAC under state law

KS: Ptf’s criminal case reversed and dismissed for a 4A violation was not factually innocent for wrongful conviction compensation

Plaintiff had his conviction reversed for an illegal search. On remand, the prosecutor dismissed. He sought compensation for his unlawful conviction. He gets no relief. State law only provides for compensation for the factually innocent, and that’s not this. In … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Good faith exception, Inevitable discovery, Waiver | Comments Off on KS: Ptf’s criminal case reversed and dismissed for a 4A violation was not factually innocent for wrongful conviction compensation

MI: Unreasonable mistake of law justifies exclusion

Defendant was stopped based on what the court previously found was a lack of reasonable suspicion from an unreasonable application of law. It previously remanded to the court of appeals to determine whether the exclusionary rule should apply. The court … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness | Comments Off on MI: Unreasonable mistake of law justifies exclusion

D.P.R.: A cell phone found with drugs had its incriminating nature immediately apparent for plain view

A cell phone found with drugs had its incriminating nature immediately apparent for plain view. United States v. Fernandez-Santos, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121462 (D.P.R. July 8, 2024). In an illegal entry case, identification evidence allegedly illegally seized is not … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Exclusionary rule, Plain view, feel, smell, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.P.R.: A cell phone found with drugs had its incriminating nature immediately apparent for plain view

LA4: Exclusionary rule not applied in civil service hearing

Applying a balancing test, the court concludes that the exclusionary rule should not apply in a civil service hearing. (However, the punishment for the offense of allegedly drinking on the job based on a BAC test of .03 was excessive.) … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on LA4: Exclusionary rule not applied in civil service hearing

W.D.Wis.: Jurisdictional issue in SW wasn’t enough to suppress here

In a domestic terrorism investigation, USMJs have the authority to issue search warrants outside their court’s jurisdiction. Defendant disputes that this investigation was not that, but it’s close enough. Even if the officers were mistaken, the court won’t suppress an … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Good faith exception, Ineffective assistance, Neutral and detached magistrate, Probable cause, Warrant execution | Comments Off on W.D.Wis.: Jurisdictional issue in SW wasn’t enough to suppress here

S.D.Ga.: State knock-and-announce statute, if it applies at all, doesn’t confer standing on an alleged guest

Plaintiff said she was an overnight guest at the house searched and thus had standing, except that was never proved. “None of those facts are present here, as there is no record evidence showing that James had personal belongings in … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Exclusionary rule, Knock and announce, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on S.D.Ga.: State knock-and-announce statute, if it applies at all, doesn’t confer standing on an alleged guest