“Hargrove left his bag on a residential property that he had no legal right to enter and in a vehicle that he had no legal right to enter. Therefore, Hargrove left the bag in a place where he could not legally retrieve it. … ([It’s] a second-degree misdemeanor to enter an unoccupied conveyance without authorization.) Moreover, he left the bag under the control of a third party, Ortiz, whom he did not know or have any control over and in a place which gave that third party the ability and legal right to seize the bag, open it, and examine its contents. As the owner of the vehicle in which the bag was left and the property on which the vehicle was located, Ortiz had the legal right to seize and examine any property that was left within her vehicle without her permission.” Hargrove v. State, 2024 Fla. App. LEXIS 3029 (Fla. 6th DCA Apr. 19, 2024).
Subjective intentions of police are irrelevant. Defendant’s window tint violation justified his stop. State v. Hall, 2024 Fla. App. LEXIS 3032 (Fla. 6th DCA Apr. 19, 2024).*
The officer here saw six to eight hand to hand drug transactions, and thus had probable cause to arrest. The patdown was permissible. People v. Williams, 2024 NY Slip Op 01389, 2024 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1379 (4th Dept. Mar. 15, 2024).*
Posted inAbandonment, Pretext, Probable cause|Comments Off on FL6: Def abandoned bag by leaving it where he had no right to re-enter to retrieve it
Defendant did not abandon his backpack that he left in the house he had a connection to. He intended to come back and get it. His reasonable expectation of privacy was objectively reasonable. United States v. Pope, 2024 D.C. App. LEXIS 147 (Apr. 18, 2024).
Defendant’s plea agreement precludes his challenging the search in a 2255. United States v. Ahmed, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70554 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 17, 2024).*
Defendant’s stop and pat down were reasonable. He matched the description of a serial robber known to be armed and willing to use his firearm impetuously. Consent to the pocket search, however, is remanded for more fact finding. Brown v. United States, 2024 D.C. App. LEXIS 149 (Apr. 18, 2024).*
Posted inAbandonment, Stop and frisk, Waiver|Comments Off on DC: A backpack left in a house and to be retrieved wasn’t abandoned
Posted inSurveillance technology|Comments Off on Fox News: SEC hit with new lawsuit alleging ‘mass surveillance’ of Americans through stock market data
Asking a detainee about his parole status reasonably relates to officer safety and imposes a negligible burden on the detainee. United States v. Ramirez, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 9388 (9th Cir. Apr. 18, 2024).
Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not challenging the probable cause to search a DVR and SD card for evidence because there was probable cause. State v. Hernandez, 2024 N.C. App. LEXIS 316 (Apr. 2, 2024).*
Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not challenging the search warrant for defendant’s blood test results from the hospital that treated him. There was probable cause and production was reasonable. State v. Flemones, 2024 La. App. LEXIS 640 (La. App. 3 Cir. Apr. 17, 2024).*
Tasering defendant was reasonable here. Officers approached him to serve a citation, and he reached toward a firearm. There was also reasonable suspicion for a frisk. United States v. Trinidad-Nova, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70530 (D.P.R. Apr. 16, 2024).*
Concealing one’s identity to the police without there being an underlying offense doesn’t create probable cause. No qualified immunity: “Our cases are clear: law enforcement needs reasonable suspicion of a ‘predicate, underlying crime,’ not a generalized suspicion a person is simply up to no good, to support an arrest for concealing identity. Keylon, 535 F.3d at 1216 (warrantless arrest for the offense of concealing identity will not satisfy the Fourth Amendment unless supported by reasonable suspicion suspect committed a predicate offense); see also Mocek, 813 F.3d at 922-23 (same); Corona, 959 F.3d at 1283-85 (same).” Bustillos v. City of Artesia, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 9354 (10th Cir. Apr. 17, 2024).
Defendant was connected by the CSLI for his cell phone to 25 attacks. “Here, it is uncontested that the two search warrant affidavits established probable cause to believe that the defendant committed the string of attacks. The only issue in this appeal is whether the affidavits demonstrated probable cause to believe that location data associated with the 781 number, the 857 number, and the defendant’s cell phone would produce evidence that the defendant committed the crimes.” And they did. Commonwealth v. Janvier, 2024 Mass. App. LEXIS 57 (Apr. 18, 2024).*
The smell of alcohol alone wasn’t justification for a search of defendant’s car for an open container. United States v. Gibson, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70389 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 17, 2024).
Petitioner’s claim defense counsel was ineffective for not seeking the CI’s identity wasn’t a ground for relief where there was probable cause no matter what. Aza v. United States, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70046 (N.D. Ala. Apr. 16, 2024).*
The officer did not unnecessarily prolong the nighttime stop by getting defendant out of the car and patting him down before putting him in the police car for safety reasons. State v. Dunbar, 2024-Ohio-1460 (4th Dist. Apr. 10, 2024).*
“The State asserts that the evidence should not be suppressed because the NOPD was entitled to conduct a La. C.Cr.P. art. 215.1, ‘Terry stop’ on Mr. Green, which would have revealed the firearm. See Terry v. Ohio, …. However, the mere concealment of a firearm, in and of itself, is not an offense subject to an arrest. Thus, we find the State failed to meet their burden of demonstrating that the evidence would have been discovered inevitably or by an independent source. … Therefore, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by suppressing the evidence seized and finding no probable cause.” State v. Green, 2024 La. App. LEXIS 638 (La. App. 4 Cir. Apr. 16, 2024).
“The Estate claims Rudolph, Holewinski, Symonds, and Turkiewicz failed to protect Wallmow from himself. Claims like these can fall under the Fourth or Fourteenth Amendment, depending on the person’s status. ‘Before a finding of probable cause, the Fourth Amendment protects an arrestee; after such a finding, the Fourteenth Amendment protects a pretrial detainee.’ … Because the standards are often interchangeable, we need not always decide which standard applies to dispose of a case. … [¶] This case is one of those. We have not decided the applicable constitutional provision where, as here, the injured party came in on a probation hold and awaited adjudication at the time of the harm.” Est. of Wallmow v. Oneida Cty., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 9294 (7th Cir. Apr. 17, 2024).*
“A traffic stop is a ‘seizure’ that requires a constitutional justification. … An officer’s investigative activity during a traffic stop is subject to both durational and subject-matter limitations. … Here, there are two ‘specific and articulable facts’ that support reasonable suspicion: (1) that defendant got his truck stuck in a ditch while attempting to turn around, and (2) that he displayed shaking, which could be a physical symptom of present intoxication. Although those facts could have multiple explanations, together they allow for an objectively reasonable inference that defendant may have been driving while impaired by an intoxicant and, therefore, support reasonable suspicion. For that reason, we conclude that Andrews did not unlawfully expand the subject-matter limitations of defendant’s stop when he asked defendant about drug use.” State v. Wicks, 332 Or. App. 67 (Apr. 17, 2024).*
This was a private search. “Here, the evidence elicited at a suppression hearing established that the owners of the apartment building were not acting as agents of a government official investigating the defendant when they chose to enter the defendant’s apartment and take photographs ….” People v. Marte, 2024 NY Slip Op 02067, 2024 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2103 (2d Dept. Apr. 17, 2024).
Posted inPrivate search, Reasonable suspicion|Comments Off on OR: Merely driving off the road wasn’t RS, but adding the driver’s demeanor at the time was
The trial court in denying the motion to suppress didn’t adequately explain the Rodriguez moment and whether there was reasonable suspicion. Remanded. State v. Jeter, 2024-Ohio-1442, 2024 Ohio App. LEXIS 1356 (6th Dist. Apr. 12, 2024).
On the totality of circumstances, the video showed defendant consented to the search of his car. He was lucid and acted like he knew what he was doing. He was 25 years old and a high school graduate. United States v. Nixon, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68922 (N.D. Ind. Apr. 16, 2024).*
In the attempt to unseal the Project Veritas search warrant, the court affirms the USMJ’s R&R that unsealing the affidavit for the warrant would reveal the government’s legal theories and witnesses while the investigation is still going on. Therefore, the affidavit will not be unsealed. In re Search Warrant Dated November 5, 2021, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68998 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 16, 2024).*
Asking defendant before a patdown during arrest what he had on him wasn’t barred by Miranda. United States v. Lester, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 9162 (6th Cir. Apr. 16, 2024).
The evidence supports the trial court’s conclusion defendant consented to taking a blood sample, and the testimony was not inherently incredible. El Pueblo de P.R. v. Justiniano, 2024 PR App. LEXIS 625 (Mar. 19, 2024)* (translated by Google).
The omitted information in the search and arrest warrant affidavits, which were practically identical, added back in doesn’t negate probable cause. Leedy v. United States, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 9159 (6th Cir. Apr. 15, 2024).*
Probable cause was shown for the search warrant for defendant’s blood drawn at a hospital after a car wreck. To the extent there is also a Franks challenge, it fails. People v. Moreno, 2024 NY Slip Op 24116, 2024 NYLJ LEXIS 1219 (Queens Co. Apr. 10, 2024).
Defendant’s protective sweep argument wasn’t preserved for appeal. People v. Liriano, 2024 NY Slip Op 02023 (1st Dept. Apr. 16, 2024).*
The affidavit for the search warrant for defendant’s place showed probable cause and nexus. United States v. Gonzalez, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67192 (D. Mass. Apr. 11, 2024).*
Despite plaintiffs’ acquittal for murder, there was probable cause for their detention before trial. Summary judgment for defendants properly granted. Washington v. City of Chi., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 9027 (7th Cir. Apr. 15, 2024).*
A hotel room search by the hotel manager after defendant’s tenancy expired was reasonable as a private search and under state law. He was also on parole, but the district court didn’t even mention that. United States v. Gay, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 8829 (7th Cir. Apr. 12, 2024).* (Of course. This isn’t even close.)
No CoA for this 2255 on ineffective assistance of counsel for not properly pursuing his Fourth Amendment claim. It was denied below on procedural grounds, and he can’t show grounds for a CoA now. United States v. Dalka, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 8002 (5th Cir. Apr. 3, 2024).*
“In sum, turning ‘an eye toward the proportionality of the force in light of all the[se] circumstances,’ Smith, 781 F.3d at 101 (emphasis added) …, an officer striking the head of a non-dangerous, non-actively resistant, partially subdued adolescent would not be objectively reasonable. Even if the Graham factors would have justified a limited degree of force, the strikes to Lewis’s head were not a proportional response.” Lewis v. Caraballo, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 8997 (4th Cir. Apr. 15, 2024).*
In a search warrant for devices capable of use in video surveillance, a cell phone qualified because apps on phones permitted home surveillance cameras (such as Ring doorbell cams) to be viewed on cell phones. United States v. Hampton, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64744 (W.D.N.Y. Apr. 9, 2024).
“The Court finds that the motion to suppress, (Dkts. 84, 85), should be denied for four reasons: (1) law enforcement officers had reasonable suspicion to detain Williams; (2) after her detention, officers developed probable cause to arrest Williams; (3) the search of the purse was incident to Williams’s arrest; and (4) the search of the purse and the seizure of the drugs inside were justified by the plain view doctrine.” United States v. Williams, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64450 (W.D. Tex. Apr. 9, 2024).*
Defendant was not in custody at the time he made self-incriminating statements. He was outside his house, not detained, and told he was free to go. United States v. McLaughlin, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65249 (W.D. Pa. Apr. 10, 2024).*
Posted inCell phones, Custody|Comments Off on W.D.N.Y.: SW for devices used for video surveillance included cell phones because apps can be used to view cameras from cell phones
“Viewing the facts in the light most favorable to Coco as the non-moving party, we conclude there is a genuine dispute as to whether there was probable cause to arrest Coco for harassing a police horse under Del. Code tit. 11, § 1250(a)(1). We cannot conclude that the facts of record demonstrate a ‘fair probability’ that Coco committed a crime when persons present during the incident disagree about the events underlying Coco’s arrest. Dempsey, 834 F.3d at 468. Thus, Coco’s unlawful detention claim survives summary judgment.” Coco v. Dear, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 8593 (3d Cir. Apr. 10, 2024).*
CoA on the merits of this post-conviction Fourth Amendment claim denied under Stone. It was litigated in state court. Batson v. Sec’y, Fla. Dep’t of Corr., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 8572 (11th Cir. Apr. 9, 2024).*
Ten ATF armed agents raided defendant’s home for weapons breaking in the door while defendant was asleep. The statement she made when four ATF officers were standing over her in the living room was custodial. United States v. Santana, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66868 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 12, 2024).*
Defendant succeeds in his Franks challenge. After a hearing, it was more likely than not that there was a false statement at least recklessly made, and it was material: “For these reasons, the Court finds that the false statement included in the search warrant affidavit was material to a finding of probable cause and without it, there would not have been probable cause to obtain DNA evidence from Defendant.” Motion to suppress granted. United States v. Norton, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44720 (D.N.M. Mar. 12, 2024), appeal filed (Apr. 11, 2024) (No. 24-2059).*
Defendant’s Franks challenge fails. There was clear corroboration of a citizen informant, and the allegedly false statements aren’t. United States v. McLaughlin, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65252 (W.D. Pa. Apr. 10, 2024).*
Even assuming there was a false statement, it’s not material to the finding of probable cause. United States v. Conner, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67333 (W.D. Tenn. Apr. 12, 2024).*
Posted inFranks doctrine|Comments Off on D.N.M.: Three Franks challenges, one successful
Violation of the state knock-and-announce statute required suppression. Officers entered with haste and didn’t give defendant the chance to surrender peaceably to the search. The statute is a century old, and it serves important privacy interests. The state’s claim that Hudson v. Michigan should be followed instead is rejected, based on State v. Cable, 51 So. 3d 434, 435 (Fla. 2010). State v. Times, 2024 Fla. App. LEXIS 2681 (Fla. 1st DCA Apr. 10, 2024).
Defendant argued that possession of a key to the place searched as set out in the affidavit for warrant showed standing. The court doesn’t have to decide that issue because he loses on the merits. That claim is lack of nexus, which is established by the affidavit for warrant. United States v. Sanders, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66816 (N.D. Ohio Apr. 11, 2024).*
Defendant challenged search warrants for cell phones, premises, and Instagram accounts. All were found constitutional and/or with good faith. The five day delay between seizure of a phone and the warrant was not unreasonable. United States v. Davis, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65836 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 10, 2024).*
Defendant seizes on one sentence in the search warrant to contend that it was overbroad. Under Andresen, parts of warrants are read in context. In context, it was not overbroad. United States v. Canaday, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64639 (N.D. Ala. Apr. 9, 2024).
Considering good faith exception first, as they do in this circuit, there was enough probable cause to show that the warrant wasn’t bare bones. The good faith exception applies. United States v. Washington, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66335 (S.D. Miss. Apr. 11, 2024).*
Probable cause was shown for defendant’s cell phone in a case involving civil disorder. Aside from his being there, the government showed there were likely communication with like-minded persons also involved. United States v. Dipippa, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61047 (W.D. Pa. Apr. 3, 2024).*
A no bail arrest for domestic violence until the first appearance violates neither the Fourth Amendment nor due process. State v. Clare, 2024 Wash. App. LEXIS 462 (Mar. 12, 2024).
CoA denied. Petitioner doesn’t show that his state Fourth Amendment claim that the warrant was based on fabricated evidence could not have been raised in state court. Stiff v. Storey, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 8554 (6th Cir. Apr. 9, 2024).*
The officers were concerned about officer safety in frisking defendants, but there wasn’t reasonable suspicion. Lambert v. Fort Peck Tribes, 2024 Mont. Fort Peck Tribe LEXIS 2 (App. Apr. 10, 2024).*
This megayacht was seized overseas for Russia sanctions. (Eduard Yurievich Khudainatov is the owner, and he’s a Russian oligarch who is a Putin proxy (per Forbes)) The claim that the initial seizure may have violated the Fourth Amendment fails because it was seized extraterritorially in Fiji. United States v. M/Y Amadea, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32845 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 22, 2024).
The court credits the officer that there were three ways to check defendant’s speed as he paced defendant: speedometer, GPS, PDA. The speeding justified the stop. United States v. Conner, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68031 (W.D. Tenn. Feb. 16, 2024).*
There was nexus shown on the totality of circumstances here. Individually, maybe not; collectively, yes. United States v. Lark, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66878 (W.D. Mich. Apr. 10, 2024).*
"If it was easy, everybody would be doing it. It isn't, and they don't." —Me
"Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but of playing a poor hand well." –Josh Billings (pseudonym of Henry Wheeler Shaw), Josh Billings on Ice, and Other Things (1868) (erroneously attributed to Robert Louis Stevenson, among others)
“I am still learning.” —Domenico Giuntalodi (but misattributed to Michelangelo Buonarroti (common phrase throughout 1500's)).
"Love work; hate mastery over others; and avoid intimacy with the government."
—Shemaya, in the Thalmud
"It is a pleasant world we live in, sir, a very pleasant world. There are bad people in it, Mr. Richard, but if there were no bad people, there would be no good lawyers."
—Charles Dickens, “The Old Curiosity Shop ... With a Frontispiece. From a Painting by Geo. Cattermole, Etc.” 255 (1848)
"A system of law that not only makes certain conduct criminal, but also lays down rules for the conduct of the authorities, often becomes complex in its application to individual cases, and will from time to time produce imperfect results, especially if one's attention is confined to the particular case at bar. Some criminals do go free because of the necessity of keeping government and its servants in their place. That is one of the costs of having and enforcing a Bill of Rights. This country is built on the assumption that the cost is worth paying, and that in the long run we are all both freer and safer if the Constitution is strictly enforced." —Williams v. Nix, 700 F. 2d 1164, 1173 (8th Cir. 1983) (Richard Sheppard Arnold, J.), rev'd Nix v. Williams, 467 US. 431 (1984).
"The criminal goes free, if he must, but it is the law that sets him free. Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws, or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence." —Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 659 (1961).
"Any costs the exclusionary rule are costs imposed directly by the Fourth Amendment."
—Yale Kamisar, 86 Mich.L.Rev. 1, 36 n. 151 (1987).
"There have been powerful hydraulic pressures throughout our history that bear heavily on the Court to water down constitutional guarantees and give the police the upper hand. That hydraulic pressure has probably never been greater than it is today." — Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 39 (1968) (Douglas, J., dissenting).
"The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their property." —Entick v. Carrington, 19 How.St.Tr. 1029, 1066, 95 Eng. Rep. 807 (C.P. 1765)
"It is a fair summary of history to say that the safeguards of liberty have frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people. And so, while we are concerned here with a shabby defrauder, we must deal with his case in the context of what are really the great themes expressed by the Fourth Amendment." —United States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56, 69 (1950) (Frankfurter, J., dissenting)
"The course of true law pertaining to searches and seizures, as enunciated here, has not–to put it mildly–run smooth." —Chapman v. United States, 365 U.S. 610, 618 (1961) (Frankfurter, J., concurring).
"A search is a search, even if it happens to disclose nothing but the bottom of a turntable." —Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 325 (1987)
"For the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. ... But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected." —Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967)
“Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” —United States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1925) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)
“Liberty—the freedom from unwarranted intrusion by government—is as easily lost through insistent nibbles by government officials who seek to do their jobs too well as by those whose purpose it is to oppress; the piranha can be as deadly as the shark.” —United States v. $124,570, 873 F.2d 1240, 1246 (9th Cir. 1989)
"You can't always get what you want / But if you try sometimes / You just might find / You get what you need." —Mick Jagger & Keith Richards, Let it Bleed (album, 1969)
"In Germany, they first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Catholic. Then they came for me–and by that time there was nobody left to speak up."
—Martin Niemöller (1945) [he served seven years in a concentration camp]
“Children grow up thinking the adult world is ordered, rational, fit for purpose. It’s crap. Becoming a man is realising that it’s all rotten. Realising how to celebrate that rottenness, that’s freedom.” – John le Carré, The Night Manager (1993), line by Richard Roper
"The point of the Fourth Amendment, which often is not grasped by zealous officers, is not that it denies law enforcement the support of the usual inferences which reasonable men draw from evidence. Its protection consists in requiring that those inferences be drawn by a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being judged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime." —Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 13-14 (1948)
The book was dedicated in the first (1982) and sixth (2025) editions to Justin William Hall (1975-2025). He was three when this project started in 1978.
