Misc.

There was probable cause for the first and second search warrants for child pornography on defendant’s devices (took ~100 pages to say that). No exclusionary rule; good faith exception applies, too. United States v. Pena, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218914 (D.N.M. Nov. 12, 2021).*

Plaintiff sued only the prosecutor’s office for an illegal search. It’s not a proper party in a § 1983 case. Smith v. Cape May Cty. Prosecutor’s Office, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219000 (D.N.J. Nov. 10, 2021).*

Habeas petitioner can’t relitigate his Fourth Amendment stop and search claim in federal court. Williams v. Greene, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219069 (D.Md. Nov. 10, 2021).*

In federal bribe case under § 666, defendant’s CSLI was legally obtained and usable to prove he wasn’t where he said he was. United States v. Pizzonia, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219094 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 12, 2021).*

Defendant’s amended 2255 Fourth Amendment claim doesn’t relate back so it’s barred (completely aside from the Stone bar). Dorsey v. United States, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219301 (W.D.Wash. Nov. 12, 2021).*

This entry was posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Good faith exception, Issue preclusion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.