W.D.Pa.: Verizon voluntarily providing CSLI was not a 4A violation

Verizon voluntarily providing CSLI when it found out a search warrant was coming was not a Fourth Amendment violation. [This would also be inevitable discovery.] United States v. Searcy, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153522 (W.D.Pa. Aug. 16, 2021).

None of the factors of reasonable suspicion alone was sufficient, but collectively they were. The officer held defendants 28 minutes by just sitting in the patrol car waiting for the drug dog. The stop was admittedly pretextual, but with reasonable suspicion on the totality. State v. Skaggs, 2021-Ohio-2803, 2021 Ohio App. LEXIS 2766 (3d Dist. Aug. 16, 2021).*

Disclosure of defendant’s urine test results did not violate her reasonable expectation of privacy because the court finds the test result in a medical center was never intended to be private. Mil. R. Evid. 513(b)(4). United States v. Chuar, 2021 CCA LEXIS 413 (A.F. Ct. Crim. App. Aug. 16, 2021) (unpublished).*

Defendant’s hand movements suggested to the officer he might be armed, and that justified his frisk. United States v. Baccus, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153478 (S.D.Ohio Aug. 16, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Cell site location information, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.