Daily Archives: October 23, 2020

VA: Automatic license plate reader information does not form an “information system”; injunction dissolved

Injunction against local police use of license plate readers vacated. “We agree with the Police Department that the ALPR system does not constitute an ‘information system’ within the intendment of the Data Act and we, therefore, reverse the decision below.” … Continue reading

Posted in Informational privacy | Comments Off on VA: Automatic license plate reader information does not form an “information system”; injunction dissolved

OR: Def’s consent and statements are suppressed, but the search with a warrant is not

While defendant’s consent to search and statements made were invalid, the search was pursuant to a valid warrant, and the product of the search is not suppressed. State v. Joaquin, 307 Ore. App. 314, 2020 Ore. App. LEXIS 1243 (Oct. … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on OR: Def’s consent and statements are suppressed, but the search with a warrant is not

D.Mont.: Warrantless taking of penile swabs from def in custody lacked exigency

Warrantless collection of penile swabs from defendant in custody lacked exigent circumstances and was suppressed. United States v. Birdsbill, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 196612 (D. Mont. Oct. 20, 2020):

Posted in Body searches, Emergency / exigency | Comments Off on D.Mont.: Warrantless taking of penile swabs from def in custody lacked exigency

OH8: Denial of cross-examination over affidavit for SW was harmless here

Officer’s statement in affidavit was assumed to be subject to cross-examination for impeachment purposes, but it was harmless error here. State v. Butts, 2020-Ohio-5011, 2020 Ohio App. LEXIS 3843 (8th Dist. Oct. 22, 2020).* [Note: a new § 60.57 on … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Probable cause | Comments Off on OH8: Denial of cross-examination over affidavit for SW was harmless here

CA6: Parole “stalking horse” rationale likely no longer good law; question is whether state parole law allowed the search

The probation and parole search “stalking horse” rationale probably is no longer good law. Defendant here was a person of interest in a homicide, and the police got his parole officer to conduct a search which was valid under state … Continue reading

Posted in Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on CA6: Parole “stalking horse” rationale likely no longer good law; question is whether state parole law allowed the search

CA9: Advancing on a prior victim with a knife resulted in a police shooting, and QI applied

“The district court found that no controlling precedent had clearly established that Omar’s right under the Fourth Amendment to be free from the excessive use of deadly force by police would be violated when he was shot and killed as … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA9: Advancing on a prior victim with a knife resulted in a police shooting, and QI applied

M.D.Fla.: IAC for failure to investigate 4A claim fails for lack of merit on search claim

“Johnson challenges his counsel’s investigation of the charged crime and his counsel’s failure to investigate the officer involved in the search warrant, surveillance, and collection of evidence. An allegation of ‘inadequate investigation does not warrant habeas relief absent a proffer … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: IAC for failure to investigate 4A claim fails for lack of merit on search claim

Cal.4th: Google turning over CP to NCMEC was private search

Google found child pornography in emails and submitted them to NCMEC. This was a private search (which is explained in detail). It is no different than the search in Jacobsen. People v. Wilson, 2020 Cal. App. LEXIS 976 (4th Dist. … Continue reading

Posted in Community caretaking function, Private search, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on Cal.4th: Google turning over CP to NCMEC was private search

CA9: Tight handcuffing can be excessive force, but this wasn’t

Tight handcuffing can be excessive force. Here, plaintiff complained, and they were loosened. He had only a slight bruise. That’s normal, and summary judgment was properly granted against that claim. Reyes v. City of Santa Ana, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Motion to suppress, Probable cause | Comments Off on CA9: Tight handcuffing can be excessive force, but this wasn’t