TX5: A safe removed from a car under the automobile exception was subject to search without a warrant

A safe removed from a car that was otherwise subject to search under the automobile exception was still subject to a warrantless search after it was removed and taken to the police station. Defendant’s effort to compare it to a cell phone requiring a warrant is rejected. Maroney v. State, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 7925 (Tex. App. – Dallas Oct. 18, 2023).

Defendant abandoned her iPhone by not seeking to reclaim it after the police seized it and getting another phone. United States v. Windham, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188195 (D. Neb. Aug. 25, 2023), adopted, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186861 (D.Neb. Oct. 18, 2023). (I completely disagree. If the police seize a phone, I tell the client move the number to another phone, and we’ll deal with the phone at the appropriate time. The police could take weeks or months to complete a search of the phone.)

As to Franks, “Presuming Defendant could make the requisite showing of intentionality—as the M&R did—Defendant also fails to demonstrate the omitted information is material to the probable cause determination.” United States v. Gill, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188376 (W.D.N.C. Oct. 18, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Abandonment, Automobile exception, Cell phones, Franks doctrine. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.