CA9: No warrant required for CI to record def

No warrant was required for the CI to record defendant, following White (1971). United States v. Sudbury, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 13921 (9th Cir. June 6, 2025).

The state can’t be compelled to seek to unseal the CI’s testimony for the search warrant here when that avenue was equally available to the defense. People v. Richards, 2025 NY Slip Op 03453 (4th Dept. June 6, 2025).*

“Here, the circumstances easily provided grounds for a Terry stop. At the suppression hearing, Tidwell and Miller each testified to being familiar with the smell of marijuana through his training. Each detective further testified that he smelled a strong odor of marijuana coming from Santiago’s car when it entered the parking lot and that the smell intensified when Santiago opened his car door. The bodycam footage shows that Tidwell told Santiago that the car ‘reek[ed] of weed.’” United States v. Santiago, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 13956 (6th Cir. June 6, 2025).*

Obtaining insurance records by subpoena for civil discovery was not unreasonable. The statute says subpoena or search warrant. Da Veiga v. Currie, 2025 Cal. Super. LEXIS 14828 (L.A. Co. May 8, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Informant hearsay, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonable suspicion, Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters, Waiver. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.