TX5: No standing in a house where def under a no contact order to stay out

Defendant had no standing to contest the search of a house he was under a no contact order to stay away from. Yet, he was found there. Coggins v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 3587 (Tex. App. – Dallas May 27, 2025).

Pro se plaintiff’s wrongful state eviction claim is barred by Rooker-Feldman, and the defendants aren’t state actors for Fourth Amendment purposes. Anderson v. Stern & Eisenberg, P.C., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100242 (D.N.J. May 27, 2025).*

The search warrant here wasn’t based solely on defendant’s indictment – there was more information. United States v. Bussey, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100152 (S.D. Ga. May 27, 2025).*

Updated: Under state law, there are heightened requirements for cell phone search warrants, and the warrant here authorized searching for and seizure but not search of the phone. A second warrant was issued to search the phone, and it was based on independent sources of information and was valid. State v. Lankford, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 3588 (Tex. App. – El Paso May 27, 2025).* On rehearing, the first search was for images and was valid and the good faith exception applied. State v. Lankford, 2026 Tex. App. LEXIS 1433 (Tex. App. — El Paso Feb. 12, 2026) (unpublished).*

This entry was posted in Cell phones, Independent source, Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Reasonable expectation of privacy. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.