Daily Archives: November 23, 2019

Four 2255s

2255 claim that officer perjured himself during suppression hearing was already raised there and on appeal and barred here. United States v. Brown, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 201044 (D. Nev. Nov. 19, 2019).* Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not pursuing … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on Four 2255s

W.D.Pa.: Even if the one challenged sentence in the SW affidavit was stricken under Franks, PC would still exist

Defendant challenged one sentence in the affidavit as a Franks violation, but it doesn’t even appear to be false. Moreover, even if that sentence were stricken, there still would be probable cause, and he fails in his burden of proof. … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Particularity, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: Even if the one challenged sentence in the SW affidavit was stricken under Franks, PC would still exist

CA4: Individualized suspicion is now required for border searches of electronic devices but it wasn’t in May 2015, so the GFE applies

Warrantless forensic searches of defendant’s devices in May of 2015 lacked the required nexus to the recognized historic rationales justifying the border search exception to the warrant requirement. Officers had probable cause to suspect that defendant had previously committed grave … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Computer and cloud searches, Good faith exception | Comments Off on CA4: Individualized suspicion is now required for border searches of electronic devices but it wasn’t in May 2015, so the GFE applies

W.D.Pa.: To make an effective attack on a SW affidavit, explain yourself and don’t leave it to the court to try to do it for you

Yes, there were inconsistencies in the informant hearsay, but the defendant doesn’t help the court in what that means. “Thus, Defendant’s hearsay attacks fail to draw the court’s attention to any problem in the magistrate judges’ analysis.” There was double … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: To make an effective attack on a SW affidavit, explain yourself and don’t leave it to the court to try to do it for you

CA9: PC for arrest of ptf for interfering with a LEO arresting another

There was probable cause to arrest plaintiff, a member of Bikers for Christ, for interfering with a law enforcement officer when the officer was attempting to write a ticket for another biker. Thus, there was no Fourth Amendment violation. Stubbs … Continue reading

Posted in Probable cause | Comments Off on CA9: PC for arrest of ptf for interfering with a LEO arresting another

NYTimes: Imagine Being on Trial. With Exonerating Evidence Trapped on Your Phone.

NYTimes: Imagine Being on Trial. With Exonerating Evidence Trapped on Your Phone. by Kashmir Hill (“Public defenders lack access to gadgets and software that could keep their clients out of jail.”)

Posted in Cell phones | Comments Off on NYTimes: Imagine Being on Trial. With Exonerating Evidence Trapped on Your Phone.

WA: Washington Privacy Act prohibiting unwarned recordings does not apply to law enforcement bodycams and dash cams

The Washington Privacy Act prohibiting unwarned recordings does not apply to law enforcement bodycams and dash cams. “Conversations with uniformed, on-duty law enforcement officers are typically not private conversations.” State v. Clayton, 2019 Wash. App. LEXIS 2930 (Nov. 19, 2019):

Posted in Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on WA: Washington Privacy Act prohibiting unwarned recordings does not apply to law enforcement bodycams and dash cams