Monthly Archives: March 2025

CA6: Franks argument subsumed within PC argument is treated as waived

Defendant’s Franks argument was skeletal and subsumed within his lack of probable cause argument. It is treated as waived. “And we consider arguments forfeited where ‘[i]ssues [are] adverted to in a perfunctory manner, unaccompanied by some effort at developed argumentation.’” … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine, Standing, Waiver | Comments Off on CA6: Franks argument subsumed within PC argument is treated as waived

OH1: For probation search, anonymous tip and knowledge of probationer was RS

While anonymous tips alone aren’t reasonable suspicion, in a probation search, an anonymous tip coupled with the PO’s knowledge of the probationer was. State v. Currie, 2025-Ohio-670 (1st Dist. Feb. 28, 2025).* Defendant’s search claim was not shown to be … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Probable cause, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on OH1: For probation search, anonymous tip and knowledge of probationer was RS

CA8: Walkway to front door where mailbox was wasn’t protected curtilage

Defendant’s front yard wasn’t curtilage where there was a walkway to the mailbox by the door. Blood spatter was visible. The officers then went through a fence based on exigency. The observations supported a warrant. United States v. McGhee, 2025 … Continue reading

Posted in Curtilage, Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on CA8: Walkway to front door where mailbox was wasn’t protected curtilage

W.D.Tex.: Body camera shows stop was unreasonably prolonged

“After considering all evidence in context, including Officer Gonzalez’s testimony, her body camera video, and the rest of the record, the Court concludes that she unlawfully prolonged the traffic stop. Even when considering her experience and all facts from an … Continue reading

Posted in Nexus, Probable cause, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on W.D.Tex.: Body camera shows stop was unreasonably prolonged

NE: PBT unnecessary for PC if it’s apparent def under influence

The officer didn’t need a PBT to have probable cause for defendant’s DUI arrest. His observation of defendant was enough. State v. Porter, 33 Neb. App. 453 (Feb. 25, 2025).* Inevitable discovery applied. The community caretaking function allowed seizure of … Continue reading

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, FISA, Inevitable discovery, Probable cause, Waiver | Comments Off on NE: PBT unnecessary for PC if it’s apparent def under influence

The automobile exception is 100 today

The automobile exception is 100 today: Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (1925). The offense date: December 15, 1921. The place: Pike 16, 16 miles east of Grand Rapids, Michigan, which I surmise is now the route of I-96 … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception | Comments Off on The automobile exception is 100 today

C.D.Cal.: “4A privileges and immunities” are two claims, not one, and both denied here

Plaintiff’s case claimed Fourth Amendment privileges and immunities, but that’s two claims because privileges and immunities is under Art. IV, § 2, cl. 1 but it doesn’t state a claim under either. Gay v. Sheriff of L.A. Cty., 2025 U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in Nexus, Privileges, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on C.D.Cal.: “4A privileges and immunities” are two claims, not one, and both denied here

NY1: SW misdescription of place to be searched not adequately resolved below; remanded

Defendant’s motion to suppress based on an apparent misdescription of the place to be searched wasn’t resolved below, so the case is remanded for further development. People v. Trulove, 2025 NY Slip Op 01178, 2025 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1170 … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Particularity, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on NY1: SW misdescription of place to be searched not adequately resolved below; remanded

GA: Shouting and arguing inside is not exigency

Yelling and arguing from inside a home is not exigent circumstances. As to a second entry, the defendant’s statements about an injury were tainted as fruit of the initial unlawful entry. Refusal to consent to re-entry did not constitute a … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Reasonable suspicion, Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters | Comments Off on GA: Shouting and arguing inside is not exigency