Reason: Federal Appeals Court Rules Takings Clause Creates Cause of Action Even Without Additional Federal or State Legislation

Reason: Federal Appeals Court Rules Takings Clause Creates Cause of Action Even Without Additional Federal or State Legislation by Ilya Somin (“Victims of uncompensated takings can sue directly under the Constitution. The case involved uncompensated seizure of horses.”). Fulton v. Fulton County Board of Commissioners, 22-12041 (11th Cir. July 31, 2025):

Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Reason: Federal Appeals Court Rules Takings Clause Creates Cause of Action Even Without Additional Federal or State Legislation

CA8: Post-Rodriguez, criminal history is still a relevant inquiry during a traffic stop as RS develops

Post-Rodriguez, criminal history is still a relevant inquiry during a traffic stop as reasonable suspicion develops. United States v. Moua, 24-2774 (8th Cir. Aug. 1, 2025) (2-1):

Continue reading
Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Uncategorized | Comments Off on CA8: Post-Rodriguez, criminal history is still a relevant inquiry during a traffic stop as RS develops

CA9: Stay against race-based ICE stops denied

Plaintiffs and class members were Latino U.S. citizens stopped and arrested and searched by ICE based merely on race, ethnicity, and location. Based on the government’s own admissions of what it was doing, the risk of recurrence was significant enough to justify denying a stay pending appeal. Perdomo v. Noem, 25-4312 (9th Cir. Aug. 1, 2025):

Continue reading
Posted in Immigration arrests | Comments Off on CA9: Stay against race-based ICE stops denied

CA1: Lying in wait to stop and inventory an unlicensed vehicle driven off wasn’t unreasonable

Officers see a car they’re interested in that was uninsured, unregistered, and with an invalid license plate. They watched and waited for someone to drive off, and then they pulled it over just to impound and inventory it. That wasn’t unreasonable. United States v. Vick, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 19023 (1st Cir. July 30, 2025):

Continue reading
Posted in Inventory | Comments Off on CA1: Lying in wait to stop and inventory an unlicensed vehicle driven off wasn’t unreasonable

M.D.Ala.: No REP from ALPR on public roads

No reasonable expectation of privacy from Automatic License Plate Readers on public roads under Carpenter. United States v. Slaybaugh, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146107 (M.D. Ala. July 10, 2025).

A mere passenger has no standing in the car he’s riding in. United States v. Doss, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146227 (E.D. Mich. July 30, 2025).*

Defendant was hospitalized and told she was not in custody when questioned. Miranda didn’t apply. United States v. Josytewa, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145733 (D. Ariz. July 30, 2025).*

Defense counsel’s not filing a motion to suppress was a strategic choice, considering the overwhelming evidence of guilt. Rodriguez v. United States, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145664 (N.D. Iowa July 30, 2025).*

Posted in Automatic license plate readers, Custody, Ineffective assistance, Standing | Comments Off on M.D.Ala.: No REP from ALPR on public roads

CA8 denies en banc 9-2 on a Rodriguez issue

The Eighth Circuit denies rehearing en banc in a Rodriguez case [remember Rodriguez came from the Eighth Circuit] with two dissenters: United States v. Puckett, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 19064 (8th Cir. July 29, 2025), Grasz with Kelly dissenting:

Continue reading
Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness | Comments Off on CA8 denies en banc 9-2 on a Rodriguez issue

TX14: No REP in electronic monitoring while on pretrial release

Updated: Defendant on electronic monitoring as a bond condition has no reasonable expectation of privacy in the GPS information. Hawkins v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 5601 (Tex. App. – Houston (14th Dist.) July 31, 2025) (substituted opinion posted Feb. 28, 2026).

Posted in GPS / Tracking Data, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on TX14: No REP in electronic monitoring while on pretrial release

TX1: Ambiguous statement wasn’t false under Franks

Was this ambiguity a “reckless” “false statement” under Franks? No. Rosales v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 5608 (Tex. App. – Houston (1st Dist.) July 31, 2025):

Continue reading
Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on TX1: Ambiguous statement wasn’t false under Franks

D.C.Cir.: Rental inspection ordinance not unconstitutional because it requires a SW if inspection refused

D.C. Code provision on rental unit inspections requires an administrative warrant if the owner refuses inspection, so it’s not facially unconstitutional. Lyle v. District of Columbia, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 18954 (D.C. Cir. July 29, 2025).

Two BAC results here: The first was challenged because the notice of consent was allegedly defective and the trial court suppressed. The second was by search warrant that wasn’t challenged. The first is immaterial. Reversed. State v. Coggins, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 5479 (Tex. App. – Houston (1st Dist.) July 29, 2025).*

Petitioner seeks a 2241 habeas as an alternative to a successor 2255 re-raising this Fourth Amendment claim, but it doesn’t fit. Crawford v. United States, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144139 (D. Mont. July 28, 2025).*

This immigration arrest was with probable cause. United States v. Guzman, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143963 (E.D.N.Y. July 28, 2025).*

Posted in Administrative search, Immigration arrests | Comments Off on D.C.Cir.: Rental inspection ordinance not unconstitutional because it requires a SW if inspection refused

NJ: State const. requires SW for car parked at state police barracks after DUI arrest

Under the New Jersey Constitution, a car impounded after a DUI arrest and parked at the State Police barracks is not subject to the automobile exception. A warrant is required. State v. Fenimore, 2025 N.J. LEXIS 747 (July 30, 2025). From the syllabus:

Continue reading
Posted in Automobile exception, State constitution | Comments Off on NJ: State const. requires SW for car parked at state police barracks after DUI arrest

D.D.C.: Vague and unsupported allegations of 4A violation during pretrial crime scene walk through denied

Defendant is a pardoned Jan. 6th defendant who had a pretrial walk through at the Capitol in October 2024. He claims the AUSA and FBI tried to read his notes in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Despite his pardon, he seeks sanctions. Denied. United States v. Pope, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143979 (D.D.C. July 28, 2025)*:

Continue reading
Posted in Burden of pleading, Burden of proof | Comments Off on D.D.C.: Vague and unsupported allegations of 4A violation during pretrial crime scene walk through denied

CA1 oral argument on lobstering as heavily regulated

CNS: First Circuit unbothered by Maine’s lobster boat snooping by Thomas F. Harrison (“Because lobstering is heavily regulated, the judges seemed to think it’s OK to track the boats’ every move even when they’re used for other purposes.”)

Posted in Administrative search, GPS / Tracking Data | Comments Off on CA1 oral argument on lobstering as heavily regulated

CA8: While the driver wasn’t the owner with the suspended license, RS separately developed to continue the stop

The officer had reasonable suspicion that the owner of the vehicle had a suspended DL, but that dissipated when he saw the driver wasn’t the same gender as the owner. But, reasonable suspicion was developing the driver was under the influence. United States v. Behrens, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 18676 (8th Cir. July 28, 2025).

Plaintiff’s false arrest claim was barred by limitations. Wynn v. City of Covington, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 18663 (6th Cir. July 25, 2025).*

Despite alleged confusion whether the warrant subject was an iPhone 11 or 13 doesn’t matter. “To finish the search analysis, the Court concludes that the warrant execution is lawful. The agents search the exact item that the warrant describes: an ‘iPhone 13 Cell Phone Assigned Call Number 505-379-9756 WITH IMEI 350183980185078.’ iPhone 13 Warrant at 1. Summarizing the Court’s complete line of reasoning, the Court concludes that the warrant execution is lawful, because the warrant itself is sufficiently particular and the Jones Aff. provides probable cause to support the warrant.” United States v. Jessen, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142697 (D.N.M. July 25, 2025).*

Posted in Cell phones, Reasonable suspicion, Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA8: While the driver wasn’t the owner with the suspended license, RS separately developed to continue the stop

Reason: The FBI Took Her $40,000 Without Explaining Why. She Fought Back—and Lost.

Reason: The FBI Took Her $40,000 Without Explaining Why. She Fought Back—and Lost. by Billy Binion (“The twist underscores just how little accountability exists in civil forfeiture, which allows law enforcement to seize assets without charging the owner with a crime.”)

Posted in Forfeiture | Comments Off on Reason: The FBI Took Her $40,000 Without Explaining Why. She Fought Back—and Lost.

D.Conn.: Despite officers’ not thinking there was apparent authority to consent, the consenter did have that authority

“The Court recognizes that Officer Nunez and a female officer expressed ambivalence as to whether N.H. could consent to a search when she was not the registered owner of the Camry.” Still, she had apparent authority to consent. United States v. Carter, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142669 (D. Conn. July 25, 2025).

Defendant’s girlfriend had apparent authority to consent to a search for a firearm that he pulled on her during an argument in the apartment they shared. United States v. Smith, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142481 (S.D.N.Y. July 25, 2025).*

Getting defendant out of the vehicle so the officer could use Google translate to talk to him didn’t violate the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Ceja-Torres, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 18662 (6th Cir. July 25, 2025).*

Posted in Apparent authority, Reasonableness | Comments Off on D.Conn.: Despite officers’ not thinking there was apparent authority to consent, the consenter did have that authority

The Guardian: Immigration agents told a teenage US citizen: ‘You’ve got no rights.’ He secretly recorded his brutal arrest

The Guardian: Immigration agents told a teenage US citizen: ‘You’ve got no rights.’ He secretly recorded his brutal arrest by Clare Considine (“Video from Kenny Laynez-Ambrosio, 18, puts fresh scrutiny on the harsh tactics used to reach the Trump administration’s ambitious enforcement targets.”)

Posted in Immigration arrests | Comments Off on The Guardian: Immigration agents told a teenage US citizen: ‘You’ve got no rights.’ He secretly recorded his brutal arrest

S.D.Cal.: Def doesn’t get discovery of cell phone govt hasn’t decrypted

When the government seizes a cell phone under a warrant and the data is encrypted and it can’t see it, it is not in “possession” for Rule 16 discovery purposes. United States v. Mejia, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142962 (S.D. Cal. July 25, 2025).

Three controlled buys from defendant’s house, the last 72 hours before the warrant, was probable cause. United States v. Kinsler, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142793 (E.D. Tenn. July 25, 2025).*

Merely having a key to another’s apartment wasn’t enough for standing. Defendant doesn’t even show that he was a guest there. United States v. Adams, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140057 (W.D.N.Y. July 22, 2025).*

The stop was justified because of the expired inspection and overtinted windshield. Then the smell of marijuana was probable cause. United States v. Ford, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141767 (D.V.I. July 24, 2025).*

Posted in Cell phones, Discovery, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on S.D.Cal.: Def doesn’t get discovery of cell phone govt hasn’t decrypted

E.D.Tex.: Return of property under Rule 41(g) requires more than a seizure that “might be” unreasonable

The fact property was held after seizure under a search warrant that might be invalid isn’t enough to order equitable return of property under Rule 41(g). Bingli Lin v. United States, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142181 (E.D. Tex. June 30, 2025).

There was probable cause for the warrants here, and they will not be suppressed. Suppression isn’t a remedy for an alleged violation of the pen register statute. United States v. Brown, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141787 (S.D. Ohio July 24, 2025).*

The officer here was on a Bronx rooftop with binoculars and saw a hand-to-hand drug transaction, and defendant got into a car. There was probable cause to search the car under the automobile exception. United States v. Rivera, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139910 (S.D.N.Y. July 22, 2025).*

Posted in Probable cause, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on E.D.Tex.: Return of property under Rule 41(g) requires more than a seizure that “might be” unreasonable

The Intercept: Border Patrol Wants Advanced AI to Spy on American Cities: Even through walls

The Intercept: Border Patrol Wants Advanced AI to Spy on American Cities by Sam Biddle (“A U.S. Border Patrol ‘Industry Day’ deck also asks for drones, seismic sensors, and tech that can see through walls.”) Really. Never read Kyllo (2001)?

Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on The Intercept: Border Patrol Wants Advanced AI to Spy on American Cities: Even through walls

CA6: Govt. waived PC argument, but GFE carries the day

The government waived reliance on probable cause in the district court, but its good faith exception was presented and supports the search. United States v. Scales, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 18324 (6th Cir. July 21, 2025).*

The magistrate’s R&R finding the stop lacked reasonable suspicion is sustained. The stop was for a hard-to-read temporary tag, but that’s not unlawful. The inevitable discovery rule doesn’t apply here because of the unreasonable stop. United States v. Thelen, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139324 (N.D. Iowa July 22, 2025).*

The court granted a motion to suppress a search a year ago. As they press forward to trial, the court finds inevitable discovery makes much of the evidence otherwise admissible at trial. United States v. Fox, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141094 (E.D.N.Y. July 23, 2025).*

Posted in Good faith exception, Inevitable discovery, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on CA6: Govt. waived PC argument, but GFE carries the day