S.D.N.Y.: Failure to plead how 4A was violated denies return of laptop

The motion for return of the target’s laptop for violating the Fourth Amendment is denied because he doesn’t plead how the Fourth Amendment was violated. Commodities Future Trading Commission v. Alexandre, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160456 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 19, 2025).

An attempt to stop is not a stop. United States v. Rose, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161729 (N.D. Ga. July 14, 2025).*

Defendant doesn’t get a 38.23 state jury instruction for lack of a fact dispute for the jury to decide. Bell v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 6407 (Tex. App. – Houston (14th Dist.) Aug. 21, 2025).*

Defendant waived appellate review of his cell phone search warrant claim by failing to include the warrant papers in the record for appeal. Journet v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 6397 (Tex. App. – Houston (1st Dist.) Aug. 21, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Burden of pleading, Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Seizure. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.