Daily Archives: May 4, 2025

DC: 2 am parking lot encounter was without RS

A radio dispatch of a suspicious vehicle on an apartment complex’s lot was so broad as to be meaningless. The trial court erred in relying on it. When the officer pulled up on the car, two occupants in the back … Continue reading

Posted in Community caretaking function, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on DC: 2 am parking lot encounter was without RS

IL: Paperwork discrepancies permitted a truck safety inspection

Continuation of a commercial moving truck stop for a safety inspection was reasonable after there were “paperwork discrepancies.” People v. Ivanchuk, 2025 IL App (4th) 241230, 2025 Ill. App. LEXIS 856 (May 1, 2025). Mere negligent omissions for a Franks … Continue reading

Posted in Administrative search, Community caretaking function, Franks doctrine, Privileges | Comments Off on IL: Paperwork discrepancies permitted a truck safety inspection

AF: Military search authorization orally supplemented was subject to GFE

There were multiple military search authorizations, and the request here was orally supplemented before issuance expanding the particularity. Also, the good faith exception applies. United States v. Johnson, 2025 CCA LEXIS 193 (A.F. Ct. Crim. App. May 2, 2025). A … Continue reading

Posted in Foreign searches, Seizure, Warrant papers, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on AF: Military search authorization orally supplemented was subject to GFE

D.Neb.: First time CI was corroborated

This first time CI, arrested the day before, was corroborated and there was probable cause. United States v. Schelling, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83754 (D. Neb. May 2, 2025).* There was reasonable suspicion with collective knowledge, and the search warrant … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Informant hearsay, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.Neb.: First time CI was corroborated

E.D.Mo.: Carpenter does not protect ISP information

Carpenter creates no protection for ISP subscriber information. No Due Process rights were violated though a § 1509 summons. United States v. Meyrand, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84060 (E.D. Mo. May 2, 2025).* This court declined to abandon the automobile … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Issue preclusion, Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Surveillance technology, Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off on E.D.Mo.: Carpenter does not protect ISP information