Category Archives: Informant hearsay

OH1: For probation search, anonymous tip and knowledge of probationer was RS

While anonymous tips alone aren’t reasonable suspicion, in a probation search, an anonymous tip coupled with the PO’s knowledge of the probationer was. State v. Currie, 2025-Ohio-670 (1st Dist. Feb. 28, 2025).* Defendant’s search claim was not shown to be … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Probable cause, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on OH1: For probation search, anonymous tip and knowledge of probationer was RS

CA8: Walkway to front door where mailbox was wasn’t protected curtilage

Defendant’s front yard wasn’t curtilage where there was a walkway to the mailbox by the door. Blood spatter was visible. The officers then went through a fence based on exigency. The observations supported a warrant. United States v. McGhee, 2025 … Continue reading

Posted in Curtilage, Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on CA8: Walkway to front door where mailbox was wasn’t protected curtilage

D.Utah: Example of how the CI’s story was supported in detail

Defendant challenges the CI’s statements as insufficient to show probable cause, but it fails. This is an example of how this court found the CI’s detail sufficient. United States v. Martinez, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30335 (D. Utah Feb. 19, … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay | Comments Off on D.Utah: Example of how the CI’s story was supported in detail

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

CA7: Four-day delay in getting released wasn’t a 4A, 8A, or 14A violation

Plaintiff pled to state charges and was to be released by the Illinois DOC. But it was a holiday weekend, and he spent four days in jail. This was neither a Fourth, Eighth, nor Fourteenth Amendment violation. Peoples v. Cook … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Informant hearsay, Probable cause | Comments Off on CA7: Four-day delay in getting released wasn’t a 4A, 8A, or 14A violation

D.Minn.: That officers could have been more careful and detailed in monitoring the CI doesn’t show a lack of PC

“Mr. Turner is correct that the use of a CRI during drug investigations is common. Moreover, the Court does not disagree that officers could have taken additional steps to yield an even higher degree of confidence that Mr. Turner was … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Probable cause, Qualified immunity, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on D.Minn.: That officers could have been more careful and detailed in monitoring the CI doesn’t show a lack of PC

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

OH5: When the trial court sustains a search on two grounds and only one is appealed, the decision will be affirmed

When the trial court sustains a search on two grounds and only one is appealed, the decision will be affirmed. State v. Alexander, 2025-Ohio-236 (4th Dist. Jan. 23, 2025). In an animal seizure case, state law requires a post-seizure administrative … Continue reading

Posted in Administrative search, Burden of pleading, Informant hearsay, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on OH5: When the trial court sustains a search on two grounds and only one is appealed, the decision will be affirmed

VI: Multiple falsities about CI made successful Franks challenge

Defendant succeeded in his Franks challenge on misleading statements about the CI as an observer rather than participant in the crime and the affidavit lacked corroborating investigative facts and omitted information about W1’s lies. All this was material to the … Continue reading

Posted in Community caretaking function, Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Informant hearsay, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on VI: Multiple falsities about CI made successful Franks challenge

E.D.N.Y.: Anonymous report of man threatening others with a gun didn’t provide RS

The anonymous report about a man threatening others in Queens adequately described defendant but it provided nothing to show that there was a crime in the offing. The stop and search was without reasonable suspicion. “On this record, it is … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Informant hearsay, Probable cause | Comments Off on E.D.N.Y.: Anonymous report of man threatening others with a gun didn’t provide RS

C.D.Cal.: Running criminal history of passenger unreasonably prolonged the stop

The stop was valid, but the stop was unreasonably prolonged without reasonable suspicion when running the criminal history of the passenger. That was not part of the incidents of the traffic stop. The frisk was also unreasonable. Also, “The Court … Continue reading

Posted in Independent source, Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on C.D.Cal.: Running criminal history of passenger unreasonably prolonged the stop

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

C.D.Cal.: Warehouse used as a residence required admin. warrant for fire inspection

A fire inspection of a warehouse that was being used as a residence was subject to the administrative warrant requirement. No exception applies. Hannan v. L.A. Cty. Fire Dep’t, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 235999 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 9, 2024). 2254 … Continue reading

Posted in Administrative search, Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on C.D.Cal.: Warehouse used as a residence required admin. warrant for fire inspection

CA4: Ditching backpack when hiding from police was abandonment

Defendant abandoned his backpack when he ditched it in a motel stairwell when he was fleeing the police. United States v. Mayberry, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 300 (4th Cir. Jan. 7, 2025). Leaving one’s backpack and a trashbag in the … Continue reading

Posted in Abandonment, Ineffective assistance, Informant hearsay, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on CA4: Ditching backpack when hiding from police was abandonment

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

D.Minn.: Disavowing ownership of the thing seized means no standing

“Here, Jackson appears to have denied any possessory interest in the SUV and the backpack. (Dkt. 22 ¶ 7 (‘Jackson was not the registered owner of the vehicle. He further claims all of the items in the vehicle and the … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Informant hearsay, Standing | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Disavowing ownership of the thing seized means no standing

CA5: Where 4A claim undecided below, it doesn’t form basis for stay

In the appeal of Texas Top Cop Shop, Inc. v. Garland, posted here, the Fifth Circuit doesn’t rely on the undecided Fourth Amendment claim in deciding on a stay. 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 32565 (5th Cir. Dec. 23, 2024).* The … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Plain view, feel, smell, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA5: Where 4A claim undecided below, it doesn’t form basis for stay

IA: Rental inspection ordinance not facially unconstitutional; administrative warrants required

The city’s rental property inspection ordinance does not fail under the state constitution’s search and seizure clause because it is not facially void in all circumstances. Administrative warrants can be obtained when there’s a proper showing. Singer v. City of … Continue reading

Posted in Administrative search, Admissibility of evidence, Informant hearsay, Probable cause | Comments Off on IA: Rental inspection ordinance not facially unconstitutional; administrative warrants required

OH3: Going right into pockets was an invalid frisk

The state failed to prove the necessity for a stop and frisk because the video shows the officer going right into defendant’s pockets and not frisking. State v. Barnes, 2024-Ohio-5865, 2024 Ohio App. LEXIS 4519 (3d Dist. Dec. 16, 2024). … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion, Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Scope of search, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on OH3: Going right into pockets was an invalid frisk

CA6: Pending state court action was place to bring 4A claim under Younger

A state court action was going on involving plaintiff and his wetlands in Michigan, and he was enjoined from certain things. After state inspectors took soil and water samples, he sued in federal court. Younger abstention applies, and the state … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Privileges, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on CA6: Pending state court action was place to bring 4A claim under Younger