- N.D.Ga.: Failure to specify how the R&R was deficient on PC finding was waiver
- Ga.Bar J.: Who Should Guard the Attorney-Client Privilege When Documents are Seized by Law Enforcement,
- OR: For particularity in electronic devices, specify what will be found
- W.D.N.C.: Traffic stop for expired tags went right to criminal history and was overlong
- ID rejects “reasonable mistake of law” and Heien under state constitution; state’s exclusionary rule is broader
ABA Journal Web 100, Best Law Blogs (2017); ABA Journal Blawg 100 (2015-16) (discontinued 2018)
by John Wesley Hall
Criminal Defense Lawyer and
Search and seizure law consultant
Little Rock, Arkansas
Contact: forhall @ aol.com / The Book
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."
“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: Pole cameras
VA: No exigency on police arrival at a “disorderly” call; entry unreasonable
“When the police arrived in response to the ‘disorderly’ call, there was no ongoing disorderly conduct or any indication of any other ongoing crime. Dickens appeared unharmed when she first opened the door to Officer Thornton’s knock, and she said … Continue reading
USA Today: A camera mounted on a light pole took video of police beating Tyre Nichols. What to know about ‘SkyCop.’
USA Today: A camera mounted on a light pole took video of police beating Tyre Nichols. What to know about ‘SkyCop.’ by Claire Thornton:
WaPo: Lawsuit alleges D.C. Housing’s cameras could ‘capture intimate details’
[I don’t normally bother to mention lawsuits until resolved, but SCOTUS is considering a pole camera case for conference in the next month or so.] WaPo: Lawsuit alleges D.C. Housing’s cameras could ‘capture intimate details’ by Justin Wm. Moyer:
SCOTUS orders SG response to pole camera cert. petition
Moore v. United States, 22-481 from SCOTUSBlog.Issue: Whether long-term police use of a surveillance camera targeted at a person’s home and curtilage is a Fourth Amendment search. The Solicitor General waived response Dec. 9. On Dec. 15, the government was … Continue reading
D.Kan.: 10 weeks of pole camera surveillance in disability fraud investigation was reasonable
Defendant was on disability. The government placed a pole camera across the street from his house to see whether he was able or not, and he was indicted for theft of public funds. Ten weeks of pole camera surveillance was … Continue reading
SCOTUS denies cert in pole camera case
Bloomberg Law: Justices Decline to Hear Home Surveillance Privacy Case (Feb. 22, 2022), referring to United States v. Tuggle, 4 F.4th 505 (7th Cir. 2021)
N.D.Ill.: A “network of pole cameras” doesn’t violate 4A
Five pole cameras were trained on defendant’s house. A “network of pole cameras” isn’t a Fourth Amendment violation. See United States v. Tuggle, 4 F.4th 505 (7th Cir. 2021). Moreover, he does not rebut the presumption of good faith with … Continue reading
MA: State law requires PC for pole camera surveillance, and officers had it
Pole camera surveillance in Massachusetts requires probable cause to set it up. Officers had it in defendant’s case, and his front door and left side of his house were watched for 15 days. Commonwealth v. Comenzo, 2022 Mass. LEXIS 54 … Continue reading
D.Conn.: No REP in pole camera surveillance of def’s business’s front door
Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in two months of pole camera surveillance of his business front door. Society would not recognize a reasonable expectation of privacy of what’s visible from the public street. United States v. Harry, 2022 … Continue reading
CA9: No standing in pole camera surveillance of house of another
Defendant doesn’t have standing to challenge prolonged pole camera surveillance of the property of another. Also, there was reasonable suspicion on the totality including collective knowledge to extend defendant’s stop for a drug dog. United States v. Cruz, 2021 U.S. … Continue reading
Bloomberg Law: Police Turn on Hidden Cameras, Turn Off Fourth Amendment
Bloomberg Law: Police Turn on Hidden Cameras, Turn Off Fourth Amendment by Joshua Windham and Daryl James, Institute for Justice:
CO: Warrantless three month pole camera surveillance violated 4A
Warrantless three month pole camera surveillance violated the Fourth Amendment. People v. Tafoya, 2021 CO 62, 2021 Colo. LEXIS 882 (Sept. 13, 2021):
CA7: Extended pole camera surveillance not 4A violation
Extended pole camera surveillance not a Fourth Amendment violation. United States v. Tuggle, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 20841 (7th Cir. July 14, 2021). If you have a pole camera case, you need to read this. What follows is part of … Continue reading
N.D.Tex.: Motion to suppress 2½ months of pole camera recording untimely
The reasonableness of 2½ months of pole camera observation of defendant’s house was waived by not filing a motion to suppress until after the First Circuit granted en banc review on that issue and then a month later. United States … Continue reading
S.D.Ohio: Pole cam observation of def with blunt was RS for stop
Zooming in on a pole cam video, officers determined that defendant had a blunt in his hand when he was getting in his car. The question is reasonable suspicion, and officers don’t have to exhaust the innocent possibilities before acting … Continue reading
FL2: Private pole camera was potentially the tort of “intrusion on seclusion”
In a fence line dispute, defendants’ posting a 25’ high pole camera watching plaintiff’s property stated a claim for intrusion on seclusion. Jackman v. Cebrink-Swartz, 2021 Fla. App. LEXIS 4321 (Fla. 2d DCA Mar. 26, 2021). So how will this … Continue reading
E.D.Wis.: No REP as to pole camera surveillance, one in an apt building hallway
Two surveillance cameras were installed; one on a pole, one in a hallway of an apartment building. Defendant, a visitor, had no reasonable expectation of privacy. A codefendant already litigated this motion and lost, and he should have acknowledged the … Continue reading
D.Kan.: Surreptitiously video recording a VA doctor’s exam does not violate 4A
The VA video recorded a physical exam of defendant as a part of a fraud investigation into obtaining VA benefits. Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy against recording because the examiner could have reported everything in detail anyway. United … Continue reading
Massachusetts holds long term pole camera surveillance of one’s home can violate REP and state constitution
Long term surveillance of defendant’s homes with pole cameras wasn’t a Fourth Amendment violation but it could violate the Massachusetts Constitution. Two defendants show a reasonable expectation of privacy under a “mosaic theory” which has been recognized in Massachusetts. Remanded … Continue reading
Colorado grants review of pole camera surveillance
“Petition for Writ of Certiorari GRANTED. EN BANC. [¶] Whether the court of appeals erred in concluding that video surveillance through a camera mounted to a utility pole constituted a warrantless search in violation of the Fourth Amendment.” People v. … Continue reading