Category Archives: Standing

CA9: State officers can consider federal crimes in assessing PC

The district court erred three ways in this case: The potential of a federal crime could be considered by the officer in determining probable cause. There was reasonable suspicion to prolong the stop. The automobile exception applied. United States v. … Continue reading

Posted in Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Scope of search, Standing | Comments Off on CA9: State officers can consider federal crimes in assessing PC

CA6: Nexus to home based on controlled buys doesn’t require constant visual surveillance

Controlled buys that included trips to defendant’s house was nexus. “Regardless of whether Sims was constantly within the detectives’ view, the affidavit establishes that for each controlled buy, Sims went straight to the buy location from the residence and returned … Continue reading

Posted in Nexus, Probable cause, Standing | Comments Off on CA6: Nexus to home based on controlled buys doesn’t require constant visual surveillance

CA2: 50 days of pole camera surveillance outside a business wasn’t unreasonable search

A pole camera outside defendant’s business for 50 days was not an unreasonable search. United States v. Harry, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5329 (2d Cir. Mar. 7, 2025). Defendant was improperly denied a hearing. The codefendant had a suppression hearing … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Pole cameras, Standing | Comments Off on CA2: 50 days of pole camera surveillance outside a business wasn’t unreasonable search

CA6: Franks argument subsumed within PC argument is treated as waived

Defendant’s Franks argument was skeletal and subsumed within his lack of probable cause argument. It is treated as waived. “And we consider arguments forfeited where ‘[i]ssues [are] adverted to in a perfunctory manner, unaccompanied by some effort at developed argumentation.’” … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine, Standing, Waiver | Comments Off on CA6: Franks argument subsumed within PC argument is treated as waived

W.D.Tex.: Body camera shows stop was unreasonably prolonged

“After considering all evidence in context, including Officer Gonzalez’s testimony, her body camera video, and the rest of the record, the Court concludes that she unlawfully prolonged the traffic stop. Even when considering her experience and all facts from an … Continue reading

Posted in Nexus, Probable cause, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on W.D.Tex.: Body camera shows stop was unreasonably prolonged

TX14: Def’s furtive movements with cell phone can justify exigency to seize it

Defendant’s furtive movements supported exigency that he could attempt to erase things on his cell phone thus justifying its warrantless seizure. Igboji v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 1021 (Tex. App. – Houston (14th Dist.) Feb. 20, 2025) (unpublished), on … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Custody, Emergency / exigency, Standing | Comments Off on TX14: Def’s furtive movements with cell phone can justify exigency to seize it

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

S.D.N.Y.: Sublessee of apartment had standing

Sublessee of an apartment had standing to challenge its search. This can’t be compared to burglars or squatters. United States v. Ephron, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28794 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 18, 2025). Defendant wasn’t seized during his encounter with the police … Continue reading

Posted in Prison and jail searches, Seizure, Standing | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: Sublessee of apartment had standing

CA11: Days of constant pole camera surveillance didn’t state a 4A claim

“As to the pole cameras, we hold that their use did not violate Williamson’s Fourth Amendment rights. The pole cameras surveilled areas exposed to the public, and the fact that they recorded non-stop is of little relevance—the Constitution does not … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Pole cameras, Standing | Comments Off on CA11: Days of constant pole camera surveillance didn’t state a 4A claim

D.N.H.: Affidavit for SW showed def’s standing

“Examining the totality of the circumstances, the evidence shows that the officers reasonably believed that Guerrero-Nuñez lived in Apartment 204 and would be present when they entered the apartment. As such, their entry into the apartment did not violate Guerrero-Nuñez’s … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Burden of proof, Standing | Comments Off on D.N.H.: Affidavit for SW showed def’s standing

CA3: There is no REP in the exterior of a package in transit

The initial detention and exterior inspection of the parcel sent to defendant did not implicate his Fourth Amendment rights because it occurred within the guaranteed delivery window. He had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the exterior of the parcel … Continue reading

Posted in Mail and packages, Motion to suppress, Plain view, feel, smell, Standing | Comments Off on CA3: There is no REP in the exterior of a package in transit

AR: Questions about legality of search before jury properly excluded under 403

Where the trial court denied the pretrial motion to suppress, cross-examination of the officer about the legality of the search was properly denied on objection by the state as potentially misleading to the jury. Damon v. State, 2025 Ark. App. … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Informant hearsay, Qualified immunity, Standing | Comments Off on AR: Questions about legality of search before jury properly excluded under 403

M.D.Fla.: Denying knowledge of the car involved was a lack of standing

Denying knowledge of the car involved was a lack of standing. United States v. Powers, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 237574 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 18, 2024), adopted, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8322 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 16, 2025). “The totality of the … Continue reading

Posted in Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: Denying knowledge of the car involved was a lack of standing

D.R.I.: Motion in limine about SW is denied; govt can refer to search in trial

Defendant’s motion in limine about whether a search warrant was utilized is denied. The government can refer incidentally to the search. United States v. Djan, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8285 (D.R.I. Jan. 10, 2025). Officers had reasonable suspicion for the … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on D.R.I.: Motion in limine about SW is denied; govt can refer to search in trial

NY3: Inventory didn’t comply with dept. policy and there was no full inventory

Defendant’s traffic stop was valid, but the state failed to show the impoundment complied with departmental policies. There was no evidence the vehicle was unsecured or unsafe if left at the scene. The inventory search failed to follow departmental procedures … Continue reading

Posted in Inventory, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on NY3: Inventory didn’t comply with dept. policy and there was no full inventory

CA8: When there’s PC for a SW, standing doesn’t even have to be decided

In a tax fraud case, there were six search warrants. Defendants challenge them all. Standing was in dispute, but doesn’t even have to be decided because there clearly is probable cause for all six, despite the claim that one piece … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Staleness, Standing | Comments Off on CA8: When there’s PC for a SW, standing doesn’t even have to be decided

ID: DV NCO denies def standing in premises

Issuance of an NCO on defendant denies him standing when he was found in the premises he was ordered from. He has no reasonable expectation of privacy once ordered away. Prior cases in accord are not overruled. State v. Ortiz, … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on ID: DV NCO denies def standing in premises

E.D.Tex.: Suppression not remedy for knock-and-announce violation

Suppression is not the remedy for a knock-and-announce violation. United States v. Bello, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 236255 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 19, 2024),* adopted, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2332 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 7, 2025).* Defendant had no standing to question … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Knock and announce, Qualified immunity, Standing | Comments Off on E.D.Tex.: Suppression not remedy for knock-and-announce violation

D.P.R.: Being in technical violation of a lease doesn’t deprive defendant of standing

“Following the logic of these cases, the fact that Defendant was apparently in technical violation of an apartment lease does not deprive him of standing to challenge the search in question. The evidence on the record indicates that Defendant was … Continue reading

Posted in Standing | Comments Off on D.P.R.: Being in technical violation of a lease doesn’t deprive defendant of standing

W.D.Wash.: Hypothetical 4A violation from civil investigative demand doesn’t confer Art. III standing

Hypothetical future Fourth Amendment injury from a state AG’s civil investigative demand doesn’t confer Art. III standing. Obria Grp., Inc. v. Ferguson, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1166 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 3, 2025). “Here, a common-sense review of the warrant affidavit … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Standing, Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters | Comments Off on W.D.Wash.: Hypothetical 4A violation from civil investigative demand doesn’t confer Art. III standing