LAT: L.A. County moves to limit license plate tracking

LAT: L.A. County moves to limit license plate tracking by Phoebe Huss & Khari Johnson (”Drivers in Los Angeles County have a powerful new privacy advocate after the L.A. County Board of Supervisors pushed to restrict how their license plates are scanned by law enforcement. The board recently voted to ask the Sheriff’s Department to more stringently regulate its use of the license plate data it collects through high-tech camera systems mounted on patrol cars and above roads. The measure it approved cited reporting from CalMatters that roughly a dozen police and sheriff’s departments throughout Southern California shared such data with federal immigration agencies.”)

Posted in Automatic license plate readers | Comments Off on LAT: L.A. County moves to limit license plate tracking

LA: Forensic search of cell phone can occur any time before trial

The forensic search of a cell phone can occur anytime between seizure and trial and still be timely. State v. Lowry, 2025 La. LEXIS 1481 (La. Oct. 25, 2025).

2255 ineffective assistance of counsel challenge for Franks violation fails for no offer of proof. Martinez v. United States, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 210120 (D.N.M. Oct. 23, 2025).*

The challenge to the search warrant fails. There was probable cause, the good faith exception would apply, and it was particular. United States v. Williams, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 209992 (N.D. Okla. Sep. 11, 2025).*

The officer here had reasonable suspicion defendant was trespassing or stealing or both when stopped. United States v. Jackson, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 209875 (E.D. Mo. Sep. 17, 2025).*

Posted in Cell phones, Franks doctrine, Good faith exception, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Warrant execution | Comments Off on LA: Forensic search of cell phone can occur any time before trial

W.D.N.C.: PC for car moots Gant argument

Defendant argues that the search of his car was void under Gant because he was handcuffed outside it. There was, however, probable cause for a vehicle search. United States v. Phillips, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 209424 (W.D.N.C. Sep. 3, 2025).*

Nexus shown to phone: “Appellant argues the affidavits submitted in support of the search of his cell phone are insufficiently particularized and contain only broad language about the tendency of people to store information on their phone. We disagree. Although the affidavits contain some language that is arguably ‘boilerplate,’ they also contain specific facts tying the phone to the offenses being investigated. … [¶] The affidavits state that appellant was arrested and charged with stalking based on allegations that he repeatedly sent unwanted and threatening messages to Balderas.” Esparza v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 8242 (Tex. App. – Dallas Oct. 24, 2025).*

No affidavit or standing means no standing: “Here, defendant has failed to meet his burden to establish a privacy interest in the subject cell phone. Because defendant has made no showing that he had a reasonable expectation of privacy over the seized device or cellular data contained therein, he does not have standing to bring this motion.” United States v. Crule, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 210281 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 7, 2025).*

Posted in Automobile exception, Burden of pleading, Nexus, Search incident, Standing | Comments Off on W.D.N.C.: PC for car moots Gant argument

Baltimore: AI identifies bag of Doritos in school as a gun

BBC: Armed police handcuff teen after AI mistakes [Doritos chip bag] for gun in US by Liv McMahon & Imran Rahman-Jones (“A US teenager was handcuffed by armed police after an artificial intelligence (AI) system mistakenly said he was carrying a gun – when really he was holding a packet of crisps. ‘Police showed up, like eight cop cars, and then they all came out with guns pointed at me talking about getting on the ground,’ 16-year-old Baltimore pupil Taki Allen told local outlet WMAR-2 News. Baltimore County Police Department said their officers ‘responded appropriately and proportionally based on the information provided at the time’. It said the AI alert was sent to human reviewers who found no threat – but the principal missed this and contacted the school’s safety team, who ultimately called the police.”)

Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on Baltimore: AI identifies bag of Doritos in school as a gun

Marketplace: What it’s like to have an AI wearable record everything you say

Imagine: Marketplace: What it’s like to have an AI wearable record everything you say by Matt Levin (“A new generation of wearable AI gadgets can record, transcribe and analyze your every interaction … There’s no widespread adoption of these always-on AI wearables just yet. But if you work in AI, chances are you’ve probably seen them. Although it’s more distressing if you know they’re probably there but you can’t see them. ‘I just always have my guard up,’ said Allie Miller, an AI consultant for Fortune 500 companies. ‘I find myself looking around a lot more. I find myself looking at people’s wrists or necks or ears. I find myself tracking where the rest of their team members are. It’s not a great position to be in.’ At a recent AI conference, Miller found out another speaker secretly recorded what she thought was a private conversation without her consent. In most states, that’s actually legal. The covert recorder wasn’t one of the newest generations of AI wearables. But Miller sees the possibility of a near future where everyone needs to assume they’re being recorded at all times.”)

Now imagine that it’s obtained by search warrant or subpoena, or abandoned, or uploaded to the cloud.

Posted in Privileges | Comments Off on Marketplace: What it’s like to have an AI wearable record everything you say

NPR: As strikes on alleged drug boats grow, so do questions about their legality and goal

NPR: As strikes on alleged drug boats grow, so do questions about their legality and goal by
Franco Ordoñez & Ryan Lucas (“The Trump administration has yet to provide public evidence to support its assertions that the individuals on the boats were cartel members and that the vessels were transporting drugs, raising concerns about the legality of the strikes and the real goals of the White House campaign. Prior to the strikes in the Pacific, the U.S. military had been ramping up the number of troops and naval ships in the Caribbean Sea off the coast of Venezuela. International law experts say it’s an unprecedented amount of military hardware to confront suspected drug boats, which has fueled questions about whether the operation is about countering narcotics trafficking or instead toppling Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro.”)

Survivors of a boat strike earlier this week were sent home, not arrested for drug smuggling.

Posted in Excessive force | Comments Off on NPR: As strikes on alleged drug boats grow, so do questions about their legality and goal

S.D.N.Y.: Incomplete series for Netflix was subject of SW

Netflix contracted with defendant to make a series. When it fell through after paying him $44M, they believed they’d been defrauded. The search warrant for what had been completed of the series was potential evidence and properly sought under the warrant. United States v. Rinsch, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 208335 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 22, 2025).*

The government satisfied inevitable discovery here. By the time of the protective sweep they had probable cause and were going to get a warrant. United States v. Gober, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 208607 (N.D.W. Va. Oct. 23, 2025).*

The affidavit for search warrant here failed to show probable cause under established case law, and the motion to suppress was properly granted. [The good faith exception is not discussed.]
State v. Nagle, 2025 Minn. LEXIS 579 (Oct. 22, 2025).*

Defendant was stopped as a suspect in a kidnapping, and his phones were validly seized. The government showed probable cause as to one phone but not the other, and even the good faith exception doesn’t save it. One phone not suppressed, one is. United States v. Chowdhury, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 208381 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 22, 2025).*

Posted in Cell phones, Inevitable discovery, Nexus, Probable cause | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: Incomplete series for Netflix was subject of SW

TX2: Basis for SW wasn’t inadmissible “hearsay”

What shows the basis for seeking a search warrant is not inadmissible “hearsay.” Williams v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 8224 (Tex. App. – Ft. Worth Oct. 23, 2025).

“But the government has grounds to search a known drug dealer’s residence when the dealer is ‘engaged in continual and ongoing operations typically involving large amounts of drugs.’ … In these circumstances, a judge can ‘infer that drug traffickers use their homes to store drugs and otherwise further their drug trafficking.’ … A warrant affidavit fortifies this inference when it provides additional evidence connecting the dealer’s operations to the residence. … Bradley was a known drug dealer engaged in continuous and ongoing trafficking operations.” United States v. Bradley, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 27517, (6th Cir. Oct. 20, 2025).*

The affidavit for this tracking warrant was based on probable cause, even if the CI’s story is discounted. United States v. Barber, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 208640 (C.D. Ill. Oct. 23, 2025).*

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Nexus, Tracking warrant | Comments Off on TX2: Basis for SW wasn’t inadmissible “hearsay”

OH5: Oath or affirmation requirement satisfied by GFE

Even if the oath or affirmation technically fails here, the good faith exception saves the warrant. State v. Lucas, 2025-Ohio-4863, 2025 Ohio App. LEXIS 3605 (5th Dist. Oct. 22, 2025).

“We conclude that the trial court properly denied the motion to suppress. Giving deference to the magistrate, we conclude that it did not err when it determined that the affidavit provided probable cause to support the search warrant. The affidavit provided a sufficient nexus between the first-degree murder based on aggravated child abuse of the victim and a search of the Defendant’s cell phone. The affidavit included the investigating officer’s experience in working on homicides and provided specific details of the investigation. The investigators met with the victim’s parents and determined that the Defendant was in exclusive control of the victim while Mother was at work. The affidavit also included the Defendant’s statement that he tripped over a toy, fell down the stairs, and dropped the victim. …” State v. Clark, 2025 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 508 (Oct. 23, 2025).*

Defendant’s after-filed affidavit of standing was sufficient to give him standing, but he loses on consent. United States v. Anthony, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 209120 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 23, 2025).*

Posted in Good faith exception, Oath or affirmation, Probable cause, Standing | Comments Off on OH5: Oath or affirmation requirement satisfied by GFE

D.P.R.: USMJ doesn’t buy officer’s RS story

USMJ just doesn’t buy that the officer could see drugs in defendant’s hand when he was running. After the stop, they were all in his pockets. United States v. Méndez-Rodríguez, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 209314 (D.P.R. Oct. 22, 2025)*:

Continue reading
Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.P.R.: USMJ doesn’t buy officer’s RS story

RawStory: ‘Chilling’: FBI shocks with visits to homes of innocent protesters under Trump’s orders

RawStory: ‘Chilling’: FBI shocks with visits to homes of innocent protesters under Trump’s orders by David Edwards:

Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on RawStory: ‘Chilling’: FBI shocks with visits to homes of innocent protesters under Trump’s orders

CA10: Merely lifting a suitcase or bag is not a search

Merely lifting a suitcase or bag is not a search, whereas squeezing (Bond) would be. United States v. Fernandez, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 27567 (10th Cir. Oct. 22, 2025).

The odor of marijuana coming from a house is still probable cause to get a warrant for it. State v. Reis, 2025 La. LEXIS 1444 (Oct. 16, 2025).*

Google sent child pornography images to NCMEC without human involvement based on its software. That was addressed on the merits, and it did not involve an unreasonable application of Strickland in resolving defense counsel’s alleged ineffective assistance of counsel. Wilson v. Gamboa, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 27597 (9th Cir. Oct. 22, 2025).*

There is no reasonable expectation of privacy the open area of a cannabis business. West v. Alexander (In re West), 2025 NY Slip Op 05858, 2025 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5967 (3d Dept. Oct. 23, 2025).*

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Unreasonable application / § 2254(d) | Comments Off on CA10: Merely lifting a suitcase or bag is not a search

CA5: A-C privilege review of seized email doesn’t have to be perfect

In this bank fraud case, the attorney-client privilege review of defendant’s email was “imperfect” but not so bad that the indictment should be dismissed. It clearly doesn’t rise to the level of “outrageous.” Yes, the review could have been done differently, and thus better, but what they did caused no prejudice at all. United States v. Ryan, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 27161 (5th Cir. Oct. 17, 2025).

The SANE interview was enough for probable cause for the DNA search warrant. In re C.P.C., 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 8067 (Tex. App. – Houston (1st Dist.) Oct. 21, 2025).*

Finding firearms justified extending the stop. United States v. McMillan, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 205885 (M.D. Ga. Oct. 20, 2025).*

Defendant’s name was nowhere on the paperwork for this rented car. While sorting this out, the drug dog arrived and alerted. The extension of the stop was reasonable for the paperwork concerns. State v. Martinez, 2025-Ohio-4786 (12th Dist. Oct. 20, 2025).*

Posted in DNA, E-mail, Privileges, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA5: A-C privilege review of seized email doesn’t have to be perfect

D.S.C.: RS is based on objective reasonableness, and don’t argue subjective intent contradictorily

For reasonable suspicion the standard is objective reasonableness. Here, the defendant argued subjective intent two ways: embracing it and rejecting it. United States v. Duggan, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 206037 (D.S.C. Oct. 20, 2025)*:

Continue reading
Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.S.C.: RS is based on objective reasonableness, and don’t argue subjective intent contradictorily

S.D.N.Y.: Accidental seizure of attorney-client jail calls doesn’t lead to exclusion of non-legal calls

Use of plaintiff’s non-privileged prison calls as evidence was not a Fourth Amendment violation. The fact attorney-client calls were also seized but were segregated and not used as evidence doesn’t state a claim. Criscuolo v. Brandow, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 205199 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 17, 2025). (But what did they learn from the attorney-client calls, if anything? Doesn’t say. Also note that this is a civil case, not a criminal case, so not purely exclusion.)

There was reasonable suspicion for this parole search for a firearm. Such information doesn’t get stale fast. United States v. Quinn, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 204996 (M.D. La. Oct. 17, 2025).*

Overtinted windows justified this stop. State v. Dugas, 2025 La. App. LEXIS 1948 ( La. App. 3 Cir Oct. 15, 2925).*

Defendant was driving a stolen car, but it’s a difficult question whether he knew it was when he was driving it. So, going to the merits instead, there was reasonable suspicion for the stop and probable cause for the search. United States v. Cherrington, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 205211 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 10, 2025).*

Posted in Prison and jail searches, Privileges, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: Accidental seizure of attorney-client jail calls doesn’t lead to exclusion of non-legal calls

AP: Judge wants immigration agents in Chicago area to wear body cameras after clashes with public

With credibility concerns, Judge wants immigration agents in Chicago area to wear body cameras after clashes with public by AP’s Christine Fernando AP.

Posted in Body cameras | Comments Off on AP: Judge wants immigration agents in Chicago area to wear body cameras after clashes with public

E.D.Ark.: There is no 4A claim by a dead person

There is no Fourth Amendment claim by a dead person. “Because the investigation failures and denial of access to the Courts are based on facts alleged to have occurred entirely after decedent’s death, Plaintiff cannot assert these claims either on decedent’s behalf or as his heir, next of kin, or personal representative.” Barajas v. Saline Cty., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 203867 (E.D. Ark. Oct. 16, 2025), quoting A.A. ex rel. Grady v. City of Florissant, 2015 WL 5561830, at *4 (E.D. Mo. Sept. 21, 2015) (“[A]s a matter of law, plaintiffs cannot proceed on claims based on any search conducted in violation of the Fourth Amendment that occurred after [decedent’s] death,”) (citing Guyton v. Phillips, 606 F.2d 248, 250 (9th Cir. 1979).

“[T]he officer here clearly articulated that she believed that the car leaving the paved portion of the road was not normal driving and was an ‘indicator of possible impairment.’” State v. Norton, 2025 VT 56 (Oct. 17, 2025).*

“[T]he Fourth Amendment requires an official seizing and detaining a person for a psychiatric evaluation to have probable cause to believe that the person is dangerous to [her]self or others. Machan v. Olney, 958 F.3d 1212, 1214 (6th Cir. 2020) (quoting Monday v. Oullette, 118 F.3d 1099, 1102 (6th Cir. 1997)).” Plater v. Doe, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 27135 (6th Cir. Oct. 17, 2025).*

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Seizure | Comments Off on E.D.Ark.: There is no 4A claim by a dead person

MSNBC: Just how many ‘Kavanaugh stops’ have American citizens been forced to endure?

MSNBC: Just how many ‘Kavanaugh stops’ have American citizens been forced to endure? by Steve Benen (“Many American citizens have been detained recently by ICE agents who thought they might be undocumented immigrants. But how many is ‘many’? When the Supreme Court weighed in on Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo last month, the Republican-appointed justices cleared the way for federal immigration officials to use racial profiling. A concurring opinion from Justice Brett Kavanaugh proved to be especially important. As the Trump appointee concluded, ICE agents can legally detain someone if they have a ‘reasonable suspicion’ that the person might be undocumented. Kavanaugh envisioned a real-world model that was efficient and effective.”)

Posted in Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on MSNBC: Just how many ‘Kavanaugh stops’ have American citizens been forced to endure?

Reason: SCOTUS Probably Won’t Put Any New Limits on Warrantless Home Searches

Reason: SCOTUS probably won’t put any new limits on warrantless home searches by Damon Root:

Continue reading
Posted in Emergency / exigency | Comments Off on Reason: SCOTUS Probably Won’t Put Any New Limits on Warrantless Home Searches

S.D.N.Y.: No REP in one’s talking to oneself in a building elevator that security cameras picked up

Plaintiff had no reasonable expectation of privacy in talking to himself in his building elevator. Therefore, Title III didn’t apply. He knew there was video recording but not audio. “While in the elevator, Plaintiff writes that that is when he said to himself that he ‘shot him in the face should’ve killed him.’” Rainey v. Ortyl, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 203507 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 10, 2025).

Plaintiff sued a law enforcement officer for following him into his house and Tasing him. The facts pled defeat qualified immunity because this violated clearly established law. Dukes v. Sheriff of Levy Cty., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 26953 (11th Cir. Oct. 16, 2025).*

The search of defendant’s motel room was valid by probation search waiver. United States v. Perry, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 204239 (W.D. Va. Oct. 16, 2025).*

“For the reasons detailed below, the Court finds that Trooper Show did not have reasonable suspicion that Defendants had committed a traffic violation but did have reasonable suspicion that Defendants were engaged in drug trafficking, thereby allowing him lawfully to conduct the stop.” United States v. Loya, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 204086 (D. Or. Oct. 16, 2025).*

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Probation / Parole search, Qualified immunity, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: No REP in one’s talking to oneself in a building elevator that security cameras picked up