Daily Archives: March 16, 2020

ColumbiaMissourian: Meet Officer Drone, the Columbia Police Department’s new tool

ColumbiaMissourian: Meet Officer Drone, the Columbia Police Department’s new tool by Connor Giffin:

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on ColumbiaMissourian: Meet Officer Drone, the Columbia Police Department’s new tool

CA7: ShotSpotter alert followed by 911 calls was RS when coupled with time of night and lack of other cars

Defendant’s car was driving out of the coverage area of a ShotSpotter alert. This was essentially an “anonymous tip” from ShotSpotter that was followed by 911 calls that independently confirmed it. The totality of the circumstances established that the officer … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA7: ShotSpotter alert followed by 911 calls was RS when coupled with time of night and lack of other cars

MN: Return of digital copies of attorney’s files seized by SW was only issue and now moot; legality of SW comes later

The attorney here was the target of a search warrant for all her files where the attorney was the suspect, not a client. That distinguishes O’Connor. The parties, the client interveners, and amici have briefed all kinds of constitutional arguments … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on MN: Return of digital copies of attorney’s files seized by SW was only issue and now moot; legality of SW comes later

E.D.Ky.: Def’s jacket was subject to search incident even though he was handcuffed and couldn’t reach it

Defendant’s jacket was subject to search incident, and his handcuffing didn’t eliminate the officer’s ability to do so. United States v. Certain, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42273 (E.D. Ky. Mar. 11, 2020), adopting, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44077 (E.D. Ky. … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonableness, Search incident | Comments Off on E.D.Ky.: Def’s jacket was subject to search incident even though he was handcuffed and couldn’t reach it

N.D.Ill.: Two police officers whose conversation was accidentally transmitted over radio had no REP in them

Plaintiffs were police officers who had what they thought was a private conversation, but, due to a radio malfunction, it was transmitted on a channel they didn’t even use and was recorded. The conversation led to their termination. The defendants … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on N.D.Ill.: Two police officers whose conversation was accidentally transmitted over radio had no REP in them

D.Ariz.: Nexus here was so “thin” that the court won’t even apply GFE

The government didn’t even show a connection between the defendant and the alleged crime to get access to his subscriber information. “While courts may find the good-faith exception to apply when an application is ‘thin,’ a showing of some connection … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Good faith exception, Prison and jail searches | Comments Off on D.Ariz.: Nexus here was so “thin” that the court won’t even apply GFE

ID: Dep. of Environmental Quality didn’t violate any REP by entering where it’s open to the public

The state Department of Environmental Quality inspectors did not violate respondent’s reasonable expectation of privacy by entering. His property was open “24/7” to the public. Idaho Dep’t of Envtl. Quality v. Gibson, 2020 Ida. LEXIS 48 (Mar. 11, 2020):

Posted in Administrative search, Consent | Comments Off on ID: Dep. of Environmental Quality didn’t violate any REP by entering where it’s open to the public

CA6: “We must take care not to confuse a bare bones affidavit with one that merely lacks probable cause.”

There was a substantial basis for finding probable cause, and this didn’t even approach “bare bones.” “We must take care not to confuse a bare bones affidavit with one that merely lacks probable cause.” The motion to suppress was properly … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception | Comments Off on CA6: “We must take care not to confuse a bare bones affidavit with one that merely lacks probable cause.”

Cal.3: The evidence supports the conclusion that def consented to his blood draw

Substantial evidence supported the finding that defendant consented to his blood draw. After the officer instructed her that the implied consent law required her to undergo a blood draw, defendant did not object or refuse to undergo the test, did … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Drug or alcohol testing, Excessive force, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on Cal.3: The evidence supports the conclusion that def consented to his blood draw