NACDL: Search & Seizure Encyclopedia: A Guide for the 4th Amendment.
View Sample Table of Contents & Sample Pages.
NACDL: Search & Seizure Encyclopedia: A Guide for the 4th Amendment.
View Sample Table of Contents & Sample Pages.
The CSLI “affidavit showed a fair probability that the cell-site location data associated with Frazier’s cell phone would further incriminate Frazier (an identified suspect in the crime at issue) by confirming that he was in the vicinity of the crime when it occurred. The affidavit contained specific facts that showed a connection between Frazier, the phone owner, and the crime.” Nexus: “Given the pervasive use of cell phones in contemporary society, Pope asserted it was reasonable to infer Frazier had his cell phone on his person when he committed the robbery. He also asserted that it was fairly probable that the cell phone location data would help confirm Frazier’s location before, during, and after the crime.” Frazier v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 8552 (Tex. App. – Houston (1st Dist.) Nov. 6, 2025).
The claim the search warrant was obtained by witness bribery is unsupported. Successor 2255 is denied. In re Alward, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 29153 (6th Cir. Nov. 5, 2025).*
“Considering the totality of the circumstances, including Officer Jensen’s training and experience, his observations of Mr. Davis driving his pickup, and the dash cam footage, we conclude the district court reasonably found Officer Jensen had a sufficient basis to believe Mr. Davis had committed a traffic violation.” Drewry v. Brenner, 2025 WY 121 (Nov. 6, 2025).*
You don’t get a hearing on a motion to suppress without showing a factual dispute to be resolved. United States v. Figueroa-Figueroa, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218467 (D.P.R. Nov. 4, 2025).
“A claim that a law enforcement official used excessive force is to be analyzed under the objective reasonableness standard of the Fourth Amendment.” The undisputed facts from the bodycam establish the reasonableness of the force. Padilla v. City of New York, 2025 NYLJ LEXIS 3465 (Queens Co. Nov. 6, 2025).*
“Gilbert fails to demonstrate that he did not have a full and fair opportunity to litigate his Fourth Amendment claim in state court under Stone. Indeed, Gilbert’s Motion to Suppress was thoroughly briefed, a lengthy evidentiary hearing was held in which two witnesses provided testimony, the state court considered the merits of Gilbert’s motion in a 19-page detailed order, and the Nevada Supreme Court issued an 18-page, reportable opinion discussing only the suppression issue. … Accordingly, not only did Gilbert have a full and fair opportunity to litigate his Fourth Amendment claim, but his claim was exceedingly and painstakingly reviewed.” Gilbert v. Henley, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218780 (D. Nev. Nov. 5, 2025).*
Entrapment is not a defense to a search warrant, so CoA denied. Neeley v. United States, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 29144 (6th Cir. Nov. 5, 2025).
The motion to suppress for lack of jurisdiction to serve warrants is denied. It’s statewide. State v. Pratt, 2025 Del. Super. LEXIS 545 (Nov. 4, 2025).*
There was reasonable suspicion for defendant’s frisk for having a gun, which was found, and search was inevitable because there were warrants for his arrest. United States v. Harris, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219311 (E.D.N.C. Oct. 3, 2025).*
“When reviewing the denial of a motion to suppress regarding a search warrant, our court first decides whether the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule applies; if it does, denial of the motion is appropriate without further inquiry.” United States v. Washington, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 29218 (5th Cir. Nov. 6, 2025).*
Not raising before conviction all the conceivable Fourth Amendment claims defendant thought were useful was a reasonable tactical decision. Perez v. United States, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220629 (D.N.D. Nov. 7, 2025).
“As the trial court noted, approximately one minute passed between the vehicle stop and when Trooper Lewis asked driver Hollings to exit the vehicle. Lewis then observed a white powder on the driver’s seat, that field tested as cocaine, and green vegetation that he suspected to be marijuana. These observations, as well as the driver’s lack of knowledge regarding their intended destination, led Lewis to believe that criminal activity may be afoot, and provided reasonable suspicion to expand the scope of his stop and [probable cause] to search the vehicle.” State v. Banks, 2025-Ohio-5082 (4th Dist. Oct. 28, 2025).*
“[E]ven if the Court were to determine that Officer Romero did not testify credibly, at the very least about his observations regarding the condition of the temporary tag once he exited his vehicle, it nonetheless would have been eminently reasonable for Officer Romero to extend the stop by a short time, if for no other reason than to notify Defendant that he was free to leave. But it was during this stage of the encounter that Officer Romero developed an additional independent basis to extend the stop, i.e., the odor of marijuana.” United States v. Joseph, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218514 (M.D. La. Nov. 5, 2025).*
WaPo: Justice Department struggles as thousands exit — and few are replaced by Perry Stein (“The Justice Department has lost thousands of experienced attorneys and backfilled a fraction of the open jobs, in part because of a lack of qualified candidates.”)
NPR: Immigration agents have new technology to identify and track people by Jude Joffe-Block (“Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is acquiring powerful new surveillance tools to identify and monitor people. They include apps that let federal agents point a cell phone at someone’s face to potentially identify them and determine their immigration status in the field, and another that can scan irises. Newly licensed software can give ‘access to vast amounts of location-based data,’ according to an archive of the website of the company that developed it, and ICE recently revived a previously frozen contract with a company that makes spyware that can hack into cell phones. The federal agency is also ramping up its social media surveillance, with new AI-driven software contracts, and is considering hiring 24/7 teams of contractors assigned to scouring various databases and platforms like Facebook and TikTok and creating dossiers on users.”)
Defendant had no standing to contest the opening of an apartment refrigerator finding a decapitated body. This was plain smell. The officers could smell the decomposing body, and that was enough to open the refrigerator door. People v. McGee, 2025 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 8668, 2025 NYLJ LEXIS 3480 (Kings Co. Nov. 7, 2025).
The product of a Brazilian cell phone search showed defendant was hiding assets he didn’t disclose to pretrial services. Release denied. United States v. Braga, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220310 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 7, 2025).*
Defendant doesn’t get discovery of the CI’s drug buy that led to the search warrant. There’s a limited privilege to not disclose the CI’s identity. United States v. Hill, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 29357 (11th Cir. Nov. 7, 2025).*
Defendant’s shifting arguments in the district court lead the court of appeals to conclude waiver of the issue now presented on appeal. United States v. Smith, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 29273 (6th Cir. Nov. 5, 2025).*
Summary by the court: “The panel affirmed the district court’s dismissal of a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against the City of Henderson, its police department, and several police officers arising from the shooting death of 12-year-old Joseph Hawatmeh, who officers attempted to rescue from a man who had killed Joseph’s mother and housekeeper, gravely wounded his sister, and was holding him hostage. [¶] The panel held that the officers did not violate Joseph’s Fourth Amendment right to be free of excessive force. The officers did not seize Joseph for Fourth Amendment purposes when they employed control tactics or force in an attempt to rescue him from an active hostage situation. Moreover, even had plaintiffs plausibly alleged a constitutional violation, the officers would be entitled to qualified immunity because Joseph’s right to be free of excessive force during an active hostage situation was not clearly established at the time of the violation.” Hawatmeh v. City of Henderson, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 29328 (9th Cir. Nov. 7, 2025). See CNS: Ninth Circuit: Police didn’t violate civil rights of 12-year-old killed in hostage standoff
The New Republic: Confirmed: ICE Is Arresting American Citizens—and Lying About It by Harry Litman (“A government that flouts the Fourth Amendment and then lies about it to courts and the people has crossed a moral and legal frontier.”)
In re Application for AT&T Non-Disclosure Order, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218179 (D.N.M. Nov. 4, 2025), is denied for lack of certification from a supervising official as required by statute.
Defendant was subject to a probation search waiver, and there was also probable cause for a warrant. United States v. German, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 215173 (S.D. Ga. Oct. 31, 2025).*
Officers did not violate clearly established law and their force escalated as force was escalated against them. This happened inside plaintiff’s home, and she had in-home video which was corroborated by the bodycams of the officers. Johnson v. Smith, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 29049 (5th Cir. Nov. 5, 2025).*
Ohio rules clearly provide a “full and fair opportunity” to litigate search and seizure claims, so habeas relief for that claim is denied. McGee v. Warden, Belmont Corr. Inst., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218066 (S.D. Ohio Nov. 5, 2025).*
A welfare check that is objectively reasonable isn’t unreasonable because of a mixed motive to arrest if necessary. State v. Leiby, 2025 Fla. App. LEXIS 8339 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 5, 2025).
The police had (plenty) of probable cause to stop defendant for a homicide. The car likely was the one involved and it was his. Shuler v. State, 2025 Md. App. LEXIS 909 (Oct. 31, 2025).*
Defendant’s Franks challenge fails. He simply doesn’t show a material falsity. United States v. McCullough, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 215232 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 31, 2025).*
Defendants are accused of a cocaine conspiracy of trafficking from South America to Europe through the US. The government obtained information from European counties via MLAT, and whatever assistance they gave to help gather information didn’t violate the Fourth Amendment.
United States v. Gogic, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 215187 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 31, 2025).*
The government’s motion to seal search warrant materials from a year ago because the investigation is ongoing is denied for lack of a showing of justification. In re Matter of Application by United States for Search Warrant to Search, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218242 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 5, 2025):
Continue reading“Defendant Halima Salman is charged with receiving military type training from a foreign terrorist organization in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2339D.” The government maintains a database of who is involved in military activities overseas: NMEC. Defendant’s husband’s cell phone was seized in Syria and the contents uploaded; pictures, social media posts, etc. There’s no challenge to that seizure. Searching the database did not violate the Fourth Amendment. There was no standing in his phone, and there’s no reasonable expectation of privacy in that database. United States v. Salman, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218278 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 5, 2025).
Officer’s seeing a hand rolled cigarette during a traffic stop for window tint was reasonable suspicion. State v. Perry, 2025-Ohio-4945 (5th Dist. Oct. 28, 2025).*
There is no doubt that there was probable cause for defendant’s detention, handcuffing, and frisk. Farden v. United States, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 213214 (D.N.M. Oct. 29, 2025).*
CoA on defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim of failing to properly litigate a Franks motion. The government supplemented the record below to clarify ambiguities. Ward v. United States, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 28591 (6th Cir. Oct. 31, 2025).*
“Applying this deference here, we conclude that the state judge properly found probable cause based on the informant’s claims that Howard stored illegal drugs at his apartment. The officer’s affidavit adequately established the informant’s reliability and basis of knowledge. First, the affidavit showed the informant’s reliability in two ways. It described the informant’s ‘past performance’ by explaining that the informant had ‘always’ given reliable information and had completed ‘umerous’ controlled buys. … It then discussed the ‘independent investigative work’ that corroborated the informant’s statements.” United States v. Howard, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 28388 (6th Cir. Oct. 28, 2025).*
Plaintiff’s challenge to his parole arrest and search is barred by Heck. Jones v. Toth, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 213537 (M.D. Pa. Oct. 29, 2025).*
The affidavit showed a substantial basis for probable cause for defendant’s CSLI to connect him to a robbery. Frazier v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 8552 (Tex. App. – Houston (1st Dist.) Nov. 6, 2025).*
3500 pages, three volumes
404 Media: DHS Gives Local Cops a Facial Recognition App To Find Immigrants by Joseph Cox:
Continue readingProPublica: “I Don’t Feel Safe”: Black Memphis Residents Report Harassment by Trump’s Police Task Force by Wendi C. Thomas & Katherine Burgess (“Trump’s Memphis Safe Task Force promised to focus on violent criminals, but after being stopped for no apparent reason, some Memphians say they don’t feel safe.”)