Daily Archives: June 17, 2023

CA7: The remedy for an overbroad SW is a motion to suppress, not a motion to dismiss

An alleged overbroad email search warrant is pursued by a motion to suppress, not a motion to dismiss. “The remedy for such Fourth Amendment violations in a criminal proceeding is suppression of the evidence, not dismissal of the indictment or … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Exclusionary rule, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on CA7: The remedy for an overbroad SW is a motion to suppress, not a motion to dismiss

KY: The conditions of parole factor into reasonableness of a parole search

Defendant did not properly preserve his state constitutional claim that warrantless parole searches should be more protective of a suspect’s rights than the Fourth Amendment. On the Fourth Amendment claim, the search complied with Samson and Knights. The conditions of … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Consent, DNA, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness | Comments Off on KY: The conditions of parole factor into reasonableness of a parole search

W.D.Mich.: Differing possessory interest claims in state and then federal court is estoppel

At a state show cause hearing, plaintiff disavowed any possessory or property interest in two pit bulls, so he’s estopped from claiming it in a § 1983 case over the dogs. Crandall v. Newaygo Cty., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104374 … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Qualified immunity, Seizure | Comments Off on W.D.Mich.: Differing possessory interest claims in state and then federal court is estoppel

E.D.Tenn.: Undated controlled buys had to be in five weeks before SW, and that’s not stale

The multiple controlled buys were undated in the search warrant application, but the common sense reading was that they were in the five weeks before the warrant issued. That shows an ongoing drug operation, and it’s not stale. United States … Continue reading

Posted in Collective knowledge, Emergency / exigency, Ineffective assistance, Staleness, Standards of review | Comments Off on E.D.Tenn.: Undated controlled buys had to be in five weeks before SW, and that’s not stale