CA6: 4A generally doesn’t apply to sentencing enhancements

“The Fourth Amendment does not apply to sentencing enhancements. … We have recognized a possible exception to this rule—when officers illegally seized the evidence for the very purpose of enhancing the defendant’s sentence—but Wyse makes no such allegation.” United States v. Wyse, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 34845 (6th Cir. Dec. 15, 2022).

The three officers in this appeal get qualified immunity because there was probable cause. They also had no personal involvement. Hugan v. City of Detroit, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 34842 (6th Cir. Dec. 15, 2022).*

Three months is not stale for a child pornography warrant. United States v. Gallagher, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 34844 (6th Cir. Dec. 15, 2022).*

Defendant challenges the reliability of the named informant. The information was corroborated enough and accurately predicted future events. Defendant also wants to inquire into the CI’s motive to inform, but the court finds it was for a beneficent purpose of her family. State v. Rosa, 2022 S.D. 76, 2022 S.D. LEXIS 143 (Dec. 14, 2022).*

This entry was posted in Exclusionary rule, Informant hearsay, Qualified immunity, Staleness. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.