Category Archives: Motion to suppress

D.Alaska: Motions in limine aren’t motions to suppress

Defendant filed a motion in limine in lieu of a motion to suppress which was otherwise out of time. A motion in limine isn’t a substitute for a motion to suppress. Nevertheless, the court goes to the merits of the … Continue reading

Posted in Collective knowledge, Motion to suppress, Qualified immunity, Standing | Comments Off on D.Alaska: Motions in limine aren’t motions to suppress

CA6: Mandamus doesn’t lie to force grant of a motion to suppress

Mandamus doesn’t lie to compel a district court to grant a motion to suppress and dismiss an indictment because of an alleged change in the dates of the charge to cover up an illegal search. There’s a possible remedy in … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress, Qualified immunity, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on CA6: Mandamus doesn’t lie to force grant of a motion to suppress

OH2: Motion to suppress not proper to challenge authentication of a record for trial

A motion to suppress doesn’t lie just because the defense thinks that a record can be authenticated under Rule 901. State v. Wolfe, 2025-Ohio-866 (2d Dist. Mar. 14, 2025). “Because Phillips did not make a contemporaneous objection to either the … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Ineffective assistance, Motion to suppress, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on OH2: Motion to suppress not proper to challenge authentication of a record for trial

D.P.R.: Motion to dismiss for an alleged illegal search is not the proper way to raise the issue

A motion to dismiss for an alleged illegal search is not the proper way to raise the issue. United States v. Ruiz-Ruiz, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47357 (D.P.R. Mar. 12, 2025):

Posted in Motion to suppress | Comments Off on D.P.R.: Motion to dismiss for an alleged illegal search is not the proper way to raise the issue

D.D.C.: Under Grubbs, a geofence de-anonymizer SW can’t be challenged before execution

Google responded to a series of search warrants for information and finally objected to a warrant to de-anonymize the information it previously provided. It can’t challenge the warrant before execution under Grubbs. Google LLC v. United States, 2025 U.S. Dist. … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress, Warrant execution | Comments Off on D.D.C.: Under Grubbs, a geofence de-anonymizer SW can’t be challenged before execution

AK: Overbroad part of cell phone SW was severable from the valid part, and that properly came in at trial

This cell phone search warrant was not particular and without probable cause as to “app data,” but it was as to text messages. “If this unlawful provision was the only provision of the warrant that authorized a search for Facebook … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Motion to suppress, Overbreadth, Probable cause | Comments Off on AK: Overbroad part of cell phone SW was severable from the valid part, and that properly came in at trial

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

NY Erie Co.: State prosecutors have no control over federal officers involved in state search for discovery purposes

State prosecutors aren’t necessarily obliged to give over information on federal officers present at a state search considering they have no control over them and their testimony may be hard fought via Touhy letters and they may have nothing additional … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on NY Erie Co.: State prosecutors have no control over federal officers involved in state search for discovery purposes

CA7: Even if police potentially escalated the situation, ptf’s use of a gun justified deadly force

Even if the officers failed to properly announce themselves and even if the defendants’ actions exacerbated the possibility of a dangerous confrontation, Ancheta’s action, the use of his gun, was an intervening cause of the deadly force. The defendants escalated … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Consent, Excessive force, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on CA7: Even if police potentially escalated the situation, ptf’s use of a gun justified deadly force

NM: Trial courts can raise search issues on their own

A trial judge in New Mexico noticed that there were an unusual number of suspect warrantless searches going unchallenged by the defense. She set suppression hearings and several cases were nolle prossed. A few survived to be heard. On certification … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Motion to suppress, Probation / Parole search, Suppression hearings, Waiver | Comments Off on NM: Trial courts can raise search issues on their own

E.D.Pa.: Remedy for illegal search is to move to suppress, not to dismiss the case

A ground to suppress a search belongs in a motion to suppress, not to dismiss the indictment. United States v. Bailey, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 198707 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 31, 2024). The search warrant didn’t provide the address of the … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Motion to suppress, Particularity, Probable cause | Comments Off on E.D.Pa.: Remedy for illegal search is to move to suppress, not to dismiss the case

C.D.Cal.: Motion to suppress admitting no facts is denied as speculative

Defendant’s motion to suppress admitting no knowledge of the facts is denied as speculative. United States v. Lipman, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158940 (C.D. Cal. Sep. 4, 2024). “Here, the totality of the circumstances indicates that Agent Oliver had a … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Issue preclusion, Motion to suppress, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on C.D.Cal.: Motion to suppress admitting no facts is denied as speculative

CA3: Reframing issues outside of the original argument below requires plain error review

Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(c)(3)’s good-cause standard applied to defendant’s specific suppression arguments that were raised for the first time on appeal rather than plain error review under Fed. R. Crim. P. 52(b). Because defendant did not demonstrate good cause … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on CA3: Reframing issues outside of the original argument below requires plain error review

S.D.Miss.: Drug SW permitted search of a safe even though not specified

This drug search warrant didn’t mention a safe, but that was a place where they could be found, so the search was proper. Also, the good faith exception applies. United States v. Manning, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109676 (S.D. Miss. … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Good faith exception, Motion to suppress, Probation / Parole search, Scope of search | Comments Off on S.D.Miss.: Drug SW permitted search of a safe even though not specified

D.Mont.: FBI 302s not discoverable to aid in PC and particularity challenge

Defendant cannot get discovery of FBI 302s just to see if the search warrant was based on whatever information that would disclose. United States v. Purkey, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104824 (D. Mont. June 11, 2024). After all, the four … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Cell site location information, Motion to suppress, Particularity, Prison and jail searches, Warrant papers | Comments Off on D.Mont.: FBI 302s not discoverable to aid in PC and particularity challenge

W.D.Pa.: File your motion to suppress, and the court will hear a Brady then

What defendant knows about his search, since it happened to him, is enough to file a motion to suppress. His discovery request beyond what he already knows about the search should wait for him to file a motion to suppress. … Continue reading

Posted in Motion to suppress | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: File your motion to suppress, and the court will hear a Brady then

S.D.Fla.: Emergency motion to quash SW denied; def can still file a motion to suppress

The target of a search filed an emergency motion to quash a search warrant for DNA to compare it to a firearm but without a showing there was DNA on the gun. The motion is denied, but the target can … Continue reading

Posted in DNA, Motion to suppress, Plain view, feel, smell, Search incident | Comments Off on S.D.Fla.: Emergency motion to quash SW denied; def can still file a motion to suppress

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

UT: Emergency aid exception permitted entry for apparent homicide victim who was missing

The emergency aid exception permitted entry into this murder scene. The victim was the grandmother of a child who punctually picked the child up every day at school. When she didn’t show for hours, the school notified police. They went … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Emergency / exigency, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on UT: Emergency aid exception permitted entry for apparent homicide victim who was missing

AR: HBO film crew ride-along on drug raid doesn’t lead to suppression

An HBO film crew was doing a ride-along with the DEA and local DTF officers for the making of “Meth Storm.” Defendant raises via post-conviction that the ride-along film crew violated the Fourth Amendment and the state constitution. The court … Continue reading

Posted in Cell site location information, Good faith exception, Ineffective assistance, Motion to suppress, Overbreadth, Warrant execution | Comments Off on AR: HBO film crew ride-along on drug raid doesn’t lead to suppression