S.D.W.Va.: State GPS warrant valid under Fourth Amendment, state issues irrelevant

State officers obtained a GPS tracking warrant in state court on probable cause. The affidavit refers to one officer, but another officer presented it and was put under oath by the judge and the judge directed the signature line be changed. That was not a Fourth Amendment violation. It did not, as defendant claims, make the warrant “totally invalid.” The state warrant is governed by the Fourth Amendment in federal court, and this one even satisfied Rule 41(d). Also, the argument that the state trial judge was not authorized by state law to issue this tracking warrant, even if true, which is not decided, the Fourth Amendment governs, not state law. Defendant also raised the question of whether the judge existed at all, but that wasn’t seriously pursued at the suppression hearing in light of the tape recording of the ex parte hearing where the warrant was issued. United States v. Hersman, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66746 (S.D. W.Va. May 10, 2013), reconsideration denied 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174831 (S.D. W.Va. December 12, 2013).

Defendant was stopped on reasonable suspicion while a search warrant for his place was in progress, and it was a valid stop. Whether the stop was valid or not under Michigan v. Summers was not presented to the trial court, and it’s waived. United States v. Riggins, 524 Fed. Appx. 123 (5th Cir. 2013).*

Defense counsel did, in fact, challenge the CI for the search warrant, so 2255 petitioner cannot prevail. United States v. Bourgeois, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67128 (D. Minn. May 10, 2013).

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.