- DE: Mandamus can’t be used as interlocutory appeal of denial of motion to suppress
- New Law Review: Policing Emotions: What Social Psychology Can Teach Fourth Amendment Doctrine
- D.Utah: Def in jail can’t get unrecorded phone calls to nonlawyers to prepare for trial
- W.D.Mich.: Inmate can’t claim a medical condition and then refuse testing on 4A grounds
- E.D.Tenn.: Items unreasonably seized under SW as outside its scope still not returned because they are forfeitable
online since Feb. 24, 2003 Approx. 350,000 visits (non-robot) since 2012 Approx. 45,000 posts since 2003 (25,700+ on WordPress as of 12/31/22)
Fourth Amendment cases,
citations, and links
Latest Slip Opinions:
U.S. Supreme Court (Home)
Federal Appellate Courts Opinions
FDsys, many district courts, other federal courts
Military Courts: C.A.A.F., Army, AF, N-M, CG, SF
State courts (and some USDC opinions)
Advanced Google Scholar
Google search tips
LII State Appellate Courts
LexisONE free caselaw
Findlaw Free Opinions
To search Search and Seizure on Lexis.com $
S. Ct. Docket
Solicitor General's site
Briefs online (but no amicus briefs)
Oyez Project (NWU)
"On the Docket"–Medill
S.Ct. Monitor: Law.com
S.Ct. Com't'ry: Law.com
General (many free):
Google Scholar | Google
LexisOne Legal Website Directory
Lexis.com (criminal law/ 4th Amd) $
Findlaw.com (4th Amd)
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Resources
FBI Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (2008) (pdf)
DEA Agents Manual (2002) (download)
DOJ Computer Search Manual (2009) (pdf)
Stringrays (ACLU No. Cal.) (pdf)
Congressional Research Service:
--Electronic Communications Privacy Act (2012)
--Overview of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (2012)
--Outline of Federal Statutes Governing Wiretapping and Electronic Eavesdropping (2012)
--Federal Statutes Governing Wiretapping and Electronic Eavesdropping (2012)
--Federal Laws Relating to Cybersecurity: Discussion of Proposed Revisions (2012)
ACLU on privacy
Electronic Frontier Foundation
NACDL’s Domestic Drone Information Center
Electronic Privacy Information Center
Criminal Appeal (post-conviction) (9th Cir.)
Section 1983 Blog
"If it was easy, everybody would be doing it. It isn't, and they don't."
“Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but of playing a poor hand well.”
–Josh Billings (pseudonym of Henry Wheeler Shaw), Josh Billings on Ice, and Other Things (1868) (erroneously attributed to Robert Louis Stevenson, among others)
“I am still learning.”
—Domenico Giuntalodi (but misattributed to Michelangelo Buonarroti (common phrase throughout 1500's)).
"Love work; hate mastery over others; and avoid intimacy with the government."
—Shemaya, in the Thalmud
"It is a pleasant world we live in, sir, a very pleasant world. There are bad people in it, Mr. Richard, but if there were no bad people, there would be no good lawyers."
—Charles Dickens, “The Old Curiosity Shop ... With a Frontispiece. From a Painting by Geo. Cattermole, Etc.” 255 (1848)
"A system of law that not only makes certain conduct criminal, but also lays down rules for the conduct of the authorities, often becomes complex in its application to individual cases, and will from time to time produce imperfect results, especially if one's attention is confined to the particular case at bar. Some criminals do go free because of the necessity of keeping government and its servants in their place. That is one of the costs of having and enforcing a Bill of Rights. This country is built on the assumption that the cost is worth paying, and that in the long run we are all both freer and safer if the Constitution is strictly enforced."
—Williams v. Nix, 700 F. 2d 1164, 1173 (8th Cir. 1983) (Richard Sheppard Arnold, J.), rev'd Nix v. Williams, 467 US. 431 (1984).
"The criminal goes free, if he must, but it is the law that sets him free. Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws, or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence."
—Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 659 (1961).
"Any costs the exclusionary rule are costs imposed directly by the Fourth Amendment."
—Yale Kamisar, 86 Mich.L.Rev. 1, 36 n. 151 (1987).
"There have been powerful hydraulic pressures throughout our history that bear heavily on the Court to water down constitutional guarantees and give the police the upper hand. That hydraulic pressure has probably never been greater than it is today."
— Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 39 (1968) (Douglas, J., dissenting).
"The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their property."
—Entick v. Carrington, 19 How.St.Tr. 1029, 1066, 95 Eng. Rep. 807 (C.P. 1765)
"It is a fair summary of history to say that the safeguards of liberty have frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people. And so, while we are concerned here with a shabby defrauder, we must deal with his case in the context of what are really the great themes expressed by the Fourth Amendment."
—United States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56, 69 (1950) (Frankfurter, J., dissenting)
"The course of true law pertaining to searches and seizures, as enunciated here, has not–to put it mildly–run smooth."
—Chapman v. United States, 365 U.S. 610, 618 (1961) (Frankfurter, J., concurring).
"A search is a search, even if it happens to disclose nothing but the bottom of a turntable."
—Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 325 (1987)
"For the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. ... But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected."
—Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967)
“Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.”
—United States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1925) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)
“Liberty—the freedom from unwarranted intrusion by government—is as easily lost through insistent nibbles by government officials who seek to do their jobs too well as by those whose purpose it is to oppress; the piranha can be as deadly as the shark.”
—United States v. $124,570, 873 F.2d 1240, 1246 (9th Cir. 1989)
"You can't always get what you want / But if you try sometimes / You just might find / You get what you need."
—Mick Jagger & Keith Richards
"In Germany, they first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Catholic. Then they came for me–and by that time there was nobody left to speak up."
—Martin Niemöller (1945) [he served seven years in a concentration camp]
“You know, most men would get discouraged by now. Fortunately for you, I am not most men!”"The point of the Fourth Amendment, which often is not grasped by zealous officers, is not that it denies law enforcement the support of the usual inferences which reasonable men draw from evidence. Its protection consists in requiring that those inferences be drawn by a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being judged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime."
---Pepé Le Pew
—Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 13-14 (1948)
Website design by Wally Waller, Little Rock
Category Archives: Informant hearsay
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
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
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
The state failed to justify the entry here on officer safety grounds because their neighbor disturbance call included no reference to potential violence or threats and no good reason could be articulated other than “officer safety” which essentially is always … Continue reading
It was permissible for officers to seize firearms seen in plain view during this protective sweep. United States v. Riley, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 198798 (S.D. Ohio Nov. 6, 2023). “Given the totality of the circumstances and the numerous distinctions … Continue reading
CA8: Officer corroborated only CI’s objective information, not the crux, but that was enough for PC for automobile exception
There was no corroboration of the incriminating part of the CI’s tale that defendant, a convicted felon, kept a gun hidden under the hood of his car. “But Officer Princivalli had no reason to find Moore’s statements untrustworthy or unreliable. … Continue reading
A drug dog alerted on defendant’s car before the dog approached an open door and sniffed inside, too. The outside alert made the inside alert reasonable. Fleming v. State, 2023 Ark. App. 439 (Oct. 4, 2023). Officers received an anonymous … Continue reading
The officer in a Florida traffic stop could get the driver out of the vehicle as a matter of course under Mimms. Under Maryland v. Wilson, he could order the passenger out, too. It was not clearly established law that … Continue reading
M.D.Fla.: Defense counsel was ineffective for not raising valid suppression issue that would have reduced Guideline range below life
Defense counsel at trial was ineffective for not raising a suppression issue that would likely have prevailed and taken defendant from a life sentence down to a 20 year MM. United States v. Dasinger, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 168974 (M.D. … Continue reading
Two anonymous tips about a car built upon one another and finding the car on the interstate was reasonable suspicion. United States v. Gonzalez, No. 422-CR-40119-KES, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 167068 (D.S.D. Sep. 15, 2023). Defendant was indicted for conspiring … Continue reading
Where the defense was consent, the alleged ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to move to suppress DNA results can’t be ineffectiveness. State v. Elder, 2023 Del. Super. LEXIS 770 (Sep. 13, 2023).* CBP officers used an “escort hold” on … Continue reading
“The trial court decided the facts were sufficient to justify a Terry stop. After taking account of the totality of the circumstances, we reverse the denial of Maxfield’s motion to quash arrest and suppress the identification and other evidence obtained, … Continue reading
The court reiterates that a CI’s successful track record supports his reliability. State v. Mosley, 2023 Minn. LEXIS 451 (Sep. 6, 2023). The exclusionary rule does not apply to supervised release violations. Defendant’s panicking to a felony arrest was “not … Continue reading
Defendant made his “substantial preliminary showing” for a possible Franks violation on the credibility of a CI to at least get a hearing. (And it sounds like he’d prevail at the hearing because the affidavit depended entirely on the CI’s … Continue reading
The target of a search warrant can’t yet get access to the affidavit in support because the case is still under investigation and there is a potential of exposing grand jury witnesses. In re Search Warrants Issued November 30, 2022, … Continue reading
The geofence warrant here satisfied the requirements of both probable cause and the good faith exception. There aren’t a lot of cases on geofence warrants, but those reaching the merits (and not just GFE) fully support the process here of … Continue reading
Defendant’s pleading only the state constitution waived the Fourth Amendment claim. State v. Bell, 2023 Ida. LEXIS 95 (Aug. 15, 2023). Defendant complained trial counsel was ineffective for not challenging a search of house that was allegedly burglarized and defendant’s … Continue reading
A records preservation letter sent to cell phone providers was not a seizure, let alone an unreasonable one. The records were later secured by search warrant. United States v. Zwiefelhofer, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134679 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 2, 2023). … Continue reading
Army: Affidavit for SW didn’t show why text messages would still be on def’s cell phone; but harmless error
The government did not show in the affidavit for search authorization that text messages would logically be found on his cell phone corroborating a sex crime victim. Nevertheless, he wasn’t prejudiced by it. United States v. Geranen, 2023 CCA LEXIS … Continue reading
An alleged violation of department policy on police chases doesn’t equal a Fourth Amendment violation. United States v. Moore, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130238 (W.D. Tenn. July 27, 2023). Speeding and erratic driving justified the stop, and alcohol was seen … Continue reading