Daily Archives: March 14, 2024

The Appeal: Forty-Six States Paid for Violent, Racist Police Training. We Should Ban Pretextual Stops Instead.

The Appeal: Forty-Six States Paid for Violent, Racist Police Training. We Should Ban Pretextual Stops Instead. by Shirley LaVarco (“For decades, we’ve been told police officers just need training and resources to do their jobs correctly. These items, including cultural … Continue reading

Posted in Pretext | Comments Off on The Appeal: Forty-Six States Paid for Violent, Racist Police Training. We Should Ban Pretextual Stops Instead.

D.N.M.: No GFE for a Franks violation

Defendant met his Franks burden and showed a false statement in the affidavit for search warrant that was material to the probable cause finding. The statement was from the chief to the affiant. Finally, there is no good faith exception … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Good faith exception, Probable cause | Comments Off on D.N.M.: No GFE for a Franks violation

PA: With PC, moving a car to a police location for a SW was reasonable

Probable cause was developed on the streets for search of defendant’s car for drug evidence when officers saw him take money, return to the car, get something small, and return to the payor, twice. Removing the car to a different … Continue reading

Posted in Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Scope of search, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on PA: With PC, moving a car to a police location for a SW was reasonable

CA6: The state’s violation of a prison policy doesn’t make a 4A claim

Plaintiff inmate “cannot state a claim for a violation of prison policy because prison policy directives are insufficient to create a liberty interest under the Fourth Amendment. See Olim v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S. 238, 250-51 (1983); ….” IFP motion denied. … Continue reading

Posted in Issue preclusion, Reasonableness | Comments Off on CA6: The state’s violation of a prison policy doesn’t make a 4A claim

MO: Collective knowledge for RS doesn’t require that every witness be called at the suppression hearing

Collective knowledge for reasonable suspicion doesn’t require that every witness be called at the suppression hearing. “While Appellant seemingly takes issue with the fact that the officer who took Victim’s report did not also testify, the Hensley test only requires … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Collective knowledge, Foreign searches, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on MO: Collective knowledge for RS doesn’t require that every witness be called at the suppression hearing