Category Archives: Informant hearsay

D.C.Cir.: Telling def to “chill out” not a seizure

“Officer Jones never made such a show of authority; he simply told Hagan, while in uniform and in a ‘conversational tone,’ to ‘chill out.’ … Jones neither told Hagan to stop nor asked him any questions. An approach by a … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Probable cause, Seizure | Comments Off on D.C.Cir.: Telling def to “chill out” not a seizure

D.Minn.: Hidden compartment could be searched under automobile exception

Under the automobile exception, a search of a compartment underneath the dashboard paneling was reasonable. United States v. Payton, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57065 (D. Minn. Mar. 29, 2024).* The search issues on appeal weren’t the issues in the trial … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Informant hearsay, Scope of search, Waiver | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Hidden compartment could be searched under automobile exception

E.D.N.Y.: Def gets Franks but govt also gets to show justification for protective sweep

There were mistakes in the affidavit that at least gets defendant a Franks hearing. The government, however, will get to provide more information about the justification for a protective sweep which is not confined to the four corners. United States … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Protective sweep | Comments Off on E.D.N.Y.: Def gets Franks but govt also gets to show justification for protective sweep

D.Minn.: Regular CI had “extensive knowledge of street gangs, firearms, and narcotics distribution”; there was PC

The CI had “extensive knowledge of street gangs, firearms, and narcotics distribution,” and he’d been providing information for three months. The officers corroborated what they could. What little omissions there were in the affidavit weren’t material to the finding of … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Informant hearsay, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Regular CI had “extensive knowledge of street gangs, firearms, and narcotics distribution”; there was PC

MA: “Any persons present” clause in SW permitted search of one who left before search but hung around

“We conclude that a search warrant authorizing a search of ‘any person present’ allows a search of any person present in the property to be searched during the execution of the search warrant, including persons present during the execution but … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Scope of search | Comments Off on MA: “Any persons present” clause in SW permitted search of one who left before search but hung around

W.D.Pa.: Prisoners stated 4A claim for recording of attorney-client calls

Prison inmates stated a claim where their prison calls to their lawyers were recorded by the provider without their knowledge. “ICS’ contention that the recording here was proper because inmates have a lowered expectation of privacy is inapplicable. First, while … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Informant hearsay, Prison and jail searches | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: Prisoners stated 4A claim for recording of attorney-client calls

CA7: CI identity irrelevant because of controlled buys

This case is about fentanyl on defendant’s person, so the identity of the CI that led police to him is irrelevant under Roviaro. Controlled buys justified his arrest. United States v. Johnson, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 4450 (7th Cir. Feb. … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Private search, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA7: CI identity irrelevant because of controlled buys

DE: Def can’t show vindictive prosecution to get names of those who allegedly provided false information to police for SW of public records

In a case involving a public official accused of misappropriating funds, there was a search warrant for office records. She claimed she was entitled to the names of those who might have provided false information to investigators for the warrant … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on DE: Def can’t show vindictive prosecution to get names of those who allegedly provided false information to police for SW of public records

E.D.Mich.: The SW failed particularity, but the govt proved inevitable discovery

“Defendant seeks to suppress all evidence seized from the subsequent 2018 search in this case because he argues the 2018 warrant was unconstitutionally overbroad. Although this Court concludes the 2018 search warrant violated the Fourth Amendment’s particularity requirement because it … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Inevitable discovery, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: The SW failed particularity, but the govt proved inevitable discovery

CA10: USMS Fugitive Task Force sufficiently different to not fall under Bivens

The USMS is sufficiently different from the defendants in Bivens to justify Bivens not applying where there was an alleged illegal entry of the Fugitive Task Force. Also, there are alternative administrative remedies. Logsdon v. United States Marshal Serv., 2024 … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA10: USMS Fugitive Task Force sufficiently different to not fall under Bivens

WI: Drug dog “instinct exception” not applicable here, even if it is ever adopted

The court declines to adopt, at least for now, a drug dog’s “instinct exception” for the dog entering defendant’s car. Other courts have adopted that exception, but factually it doesn’t even apply here because the court finds the dog was … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Informant hearsay, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on WI: Drug dog “instinct exception” not applicable here, even if it is ever adopted

Cal.5: Defective notice of Facebook warrant under CalECPA doesn’t require suppression

Defendant’s Facebook account was accessed by a search warrant issued under CalECPA. The notice provision was not complied with by the state, but the court declines to suppress here. The standard for suppression in CalECPA is the same as for … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Computer and cloud searches, Informant hearsay, Social media warrants, Warrant execution | Comments Off on Cal.5: Defective notice of Facebook warrant under CalECPA doesn’t require suppression

MS: No REP against CI recording you in your own house during drug deal

911 was called about a man passed out in his pickup truck in his driveway at the street.There was no reasonable expectation of privacy against letting in a wired CI under Hoffa. Douglas v. State, 2024 Miss. LEXIS 24 (Jan. … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Good faith exception, Informant hearsay, Plain view, feel, smell, Probable cause, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on MS: No REP against CI recording you in your own house during drug deal

OH11: Running passenger’s ID through database didn’t violate Rodriguez

With no Ohio cases on point, looking to federal cases, the court concludes that running the passenger’s ID too was incidental to the stop and didn’t unreasonably extend it. State v. Foti, 2024-Ohio-39, 2024 Ohio App. LEXIS 47 (11th Dist. … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on OH11: Running passenger’s ID through database didn’t violate Rodriguez

WY: Def’s girlfriend showed apparent authority to enter their apartment after domestic dispute; Illinois v. Rodriguez redux

Officer’s reasonably relied on defendant’s girlfriend’s apparent authority to enter his apartment. She called 911 about what she described as a domestic assault where he struck her face. When police arrived, she was outside the apartment sitting on the stairs. … Continue reading

Posted in Apparent authority, Burden of proof, Informant hearsay, Inventory | Comments Off on WY: Def’s girlfriend showed apparent authority to enter their apartment after domestic dispute; Illinois v. Rodriguez redux

NY4: No standing in search of a common basement storage area “not associated with his apartment”

Defendant showed no standing to contest a search of a common basement storage area, “not associated with his apartment.” People v. Ocasio, 2023 NY Slip Op 06623, 2023 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6727 (4th Dept. Dec. 22, 2023). Even if … Continue reading

Posted in Independent source, Informant hearsay, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Standing | Comments Off on NY4: No standing in search of a common basement storage area “not associated with his apartment”

WA: Def’s first appearance where bail was set under Gerstein not critical stage requiring counsel because bail could be revisited

Defendant’s first appearance where bail was set under Gerstein was not a critical stage requiring counsel because bail could be revisited. State v. Heng, 2023 Wash. LEXIS 603 (Dec. 7, 2023). “The government contends that [the search] was justified both … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Protective sweep | Comments Off on WA: Def’s first appearance where bail was set under Gerstein not critical stage requiring counsel because bail could be revisited

LA4: CI’s success rate not important when CI corroborated by controlled buy

The affidavit for the warrant here did, in fact, show probable cause and nexus from the informant’s reports corroborated by observations of the officers. The lack of a success rate by the CI wasn’t as important when he was corroborated … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on LA4: CI’s success rate not important when CI corroborated by controlled buy

S.D.N.Y.: If the SW lacks PC, the remedy is a motion to suppress, not a motion to rescind the SW via 41(g)

Defendant filed a motion for the court to rescind the search warrant for his cell phone under Rule 41(g) because it was allegedly defective. The remedy is a motion to suppress, not to rescind. United States v. Cardenas, 2023 U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Good faith exception, Informant hearsay, Probable cause, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: If the SW lacks PC, the remedy is a motion to suppress, not a motion to rescind the SW via 41(g)

CA5: After a fire at def’s trailer, his false statements as to his whereabouts added to PC for SW for cell phone

Defendant lived at a trailer that burned, and a body was found inside. After it was determined that he gave false information about his whereabouts that day, state officers got a search warrant for his cell phone and location information. … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Informant hearsay, Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA5: After a fire at def’s trailer, his false statements as to his whereabouts added to PC for SW for cell phone