Sophie Z. Lee, The Reconciliation Roots of Fourth Amendment Privacy

Sophie Z. Lee, The Reconciliation Roots of Fourth Amendment Privacy, 91 U. Chi. L. Rev. 2139 (2024):

Continue reading
Posted in SCOTUS | Comments Off on Sophie Z. Lee, The Reconciliation Roots of Fourth Amendment Privacy

CA3: Apartment visitor to conduct drug deal has no standing

An apartment visitor to conduct a drug deal has no standing to contest a search that happened while he was there. United States v. Loyal, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5853 (3d Cir. Mar. 13, 2025).

By collective knowledge, there was reasonable suspicion defendant’s car was involved in multiple shootings and that justified the stop. United States v. Soltani, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45419 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 13, 2025).*

The district court credited the officer’s testimony at the suppression hearing, and that binds the appeals court. United States v. Buck, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5933 (5th Cir. Mar. 13, 2025).*

Defendant’s stop for no turn signal was valid no matter the subjective motivation. State v. Sanchez, 33 Neb. App. 495 (Mar. 11, 2025).*

Posted in Collective knowledge, Pretext, Standards of review, Standing | Comments Off on CA3: Apartment visitor to conduct drug deal has no standing

CA6: Mandamus doesn’t lie to force grant of a motion to suppress

Mandamus doesn’t lie to compel a district court to grant a motion to suppress and dismiss an indictment because of an alleged change in the dates of the charge to cover up an illegal search. There’s a possible remedy in the district court if it’s litigated. In re McDonald, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5864 (6th Cir. Mar. 12, 2025).

The officer’s ordering defendant out of the vehicle was reasonable, but the frisk that followed wasn’t. “However, based on the totality of the circumstances, we conclude the troopers failed to articulate specific facts from which they could reasonably infer that Miller was armed and dangerous to justify a Terry frisk. A factually analogous case, Commonwealth v. Henderson, No. 882 MDA 2023, 2024 WL 4235017 (Pa. Super. filed Sept. 19, 2024) (unpublished memorandum), is instructive.” Commonwealth v. Miller, 2025 PA Super 61 (Mar. 14, 2025).*

Plaintiff can’t cite a similar excessive force case to his, so the officers get qualified immunity. Smith v. Town of Chino Valley, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6016 (9th Cir. Mar. 14, 2025).*

A dimly blinking turn signal wasn’t functioning properly, and that justified this stop. State v. Perry, 318 Neb. 613 (Mar. 14, 2025).*

Posted in Motion to suppress, Qualified immunity, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on CA6: Mandamus doesn’t lie to force grant of a motion to suppress

VI: Wife had apparent authority to consent to search for firearm in bedroom, even if they didn’t share it

Defendant’s wife had apparent common authority to consent to a police entry while defendant slept. She led police into the home and directed them to the handgun in defendant’s bedroom closet. This satisfied co-occupant consent. They lived together, she knew the keypad code to unlock the front door, and, regardless of whether she regularly slept in the same bedroom, there was no evidence that she was obstructed from entering the bedroom and defendant did not object to her presence or that of the officers upon awakening. People v. Thomas, 2025 V.I. Supreme LEXIS 8 (Mar. 11, 2025).

A civil fabrication of evidence claim arises under both the Fourth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment due process. Clark v. Abdallah, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5878 (6th Cir. Mar. 13, 2025).*

As presented, evidence of defendant’s refusal to submit to a blood test is a novel question remanded for reconsideration. The trial court didn’t rule. State v. Dias, 2025 Ga. LEXIS 61 (Mar. 13, 2025).*

Posted in Apparent authority, Consent, Privileges | Comments Off on VI: Wife had apparent authority to consent to search for firearm in bedroom, even if they didn’t share it

GA: SW for air bag module and vehicle black box issued with PC and was particular

This search warrant for the Airbag Control Modules and the vehicle’s black box was issued on probable cause and was particular in a vehicular homicide case. Hutchins v. State, 2025 Ga. App. LEXIS 134 (Mar. 13, 2025):

Continue reading
Posted in Surveillance technology | Comments Off on GA: SW for air bag module and vehicle black box issued with PC and was particular

W.D.N.Y.: Just saying the Stone bar is “misplaced” isn’t an answer

“In his reply …, Petitioner asserts in conclusory fashion that Respondent’s application of Stone is ‘misplaced.’ … However, he fails to explain why this is so. Nor does he attempt to show that he did not have a ‘full and fair opportunity’ to litigate his Fourth Amendment claims or that there was an ‘unconscionable breakdown’ in New York State’s corrective process. ‘As the Second Circuit explicitly has held, “a mere disagreement with the outcome of a state court ruling is not the equivalent of an unconscionable breakdown in the state’s corrective process.’” Navarro, 2023 WL 8375858, at 6 … Petitioner therefore cannot overcome the preclusive effect of Stone, and the Fourth Amendment claims in Points Two, Three, and Four are barred from habeas review.” Figueroa v. New York, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46104 (W.D.N.Y. Mar. 13, 2025).

Defendant’s slightly slurred speech caught on bodycam might not have been probable cause, but a bunch of empty beer cans in the back of his pickup and the apparent smell of beer in the truck was. Search warrant valid. State v. Karpin, 2025 Del. Super. LEXIS 124 (Mar. 13, 2025).*

Defendant’s CSLI argument was lost on direct appeal and can’t be relitigated in his 2255. United States v. Herron, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47240 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 14, 2025).*

Posted in Issue preclusion, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on W.D.N.Y.: Just saying the Stone bar is “misplaced” isn’t an answer

OH2: Motion to suppress not proper to challenge authentication of a record for trial

A motion to suppress doesn’t lie just because the defense thinks that a record can be authenticated under Rule 901. State v. Wolfe, 2025-Ohio-866 (2d Dist. Mar. 14, 2025).

“Because Phillips did not make a contemporaneous objection to either the admission of the body-camera footage or the search warrant at trial, his argument on this issue is procedurally barred.” It’s not plain error, either. Phillips v. State, 2025 Miss. LEXIS 69 (Mar. 13, 2025).*

Defense counsel’s failure to look at the cell phone search production that led to hearsay text messages coming in was ineffective assistance of counsel. People v. Cousins, 2025 NY Slip Op 01535 (4th Dept. Mar. 14, 2025).*

“This case presents a narrow question: whether possession of a shopping cart in a place where shopping carts are not usually found (i.e., away from a store with shopping carts) provides a reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory detention. We hold that it does not.” State v. Fink, 2025 Ida. App. LEXIS 11 (Mar. 14, 2025).*

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Ineffective assistance, Motion to suppress, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on OH2: Motion to suppress not proper to challenge authentication of a record for trial

IN: Greyhound bus subject to automobile exception because dog alerted on luggage compartment

If you’re riding a bus and drugs are found on one, are all subject to search. The answer can’t be yes, but it is here:

Defendant was a passenger on a Greyhound bus on I-80. The bus crossed the centerline more than once so an officer decided to stop it. While checking the paperwork, a drug dog arrived and sniffed around the luggage compartment, and the dog alerted. Some passengers had gotten off the bus to smoke while they waited, which the officer thought odd. Consent to search the bus was sought, but the driver said that Greyhound itself had to agree to that. On the bus, consent to search some bags led to finding firearms, particularly an AR-15 type pistol. A bag in the overhead went unclaimed, and that produced marijuana. “In total, the traffic stop lasted around one hour and led to the recovery of over one hundred grams of narcotics, about fifteen pounds of marijuana, four handguns, and some ‘wanted individuals.’” The dog alert to the luggage compartment gave probable cause to search all the luggage under the automobile exception. Also of note: Greyhound buses are relatively highly regulated. Dunem v. State, 2025 Ind. App. LEXIS 73 (Mar. 14, 2025):

Continue reading
Posted in Automobile exception | Comments Off on IN: Greyhound bus subject to automobile exception because dog alerted on luggage compartment

D.P.R.: Motion to dismiss for an alleged illegal search is not the proper way to raise the issue

A motion to dismiss for an alleged illegal search is not the proper way to raise the issue. United States v. Ruiz-Ruiz, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47357 (D.P.R. Mar. 12, 2025):

Continue reading
Posted in Motion to suppress | Comments Off on D.P.R.: Motion to dismiss for an alleged illegal search is not the proper way to raise the issue

55 years ago today: NPR: On This Day In 1970: Hruska Links Judge To ‘Mediocre’

NPR: On This Day In 1970: Hruska Links Judge To ‘Mediocre’ by Ken Rudin:

Continue reading
Posted in SCOTUS | Comments Off on 55 years ago today: NPR: On This Day In 1970: Hruska Links Judge To ‘Mediocre’

MD: A search warrant for a car’s GPS system

A search warrant for a car’s GPS system: “Officers also executed a ‘Berla warrant’2 to extract navigation data from the car’s GPS system. The navigation data showed that, on the morning of the shooting, the Maserati left Oak Haven Circle in Windsor Mill. The Maserati was at the intersection of West Mulberry and North Greene Streets at around 6:30 p.m. on the same day. The Maserati returned to Windsor Mill at 7:51 p.m.
“2. Berla manufactures a product that enables the police to ‘access the infotainment system of many newer vehicles.’ Adam M. Gershowitz, The Tesla Meets the Fourth Amendment, 48 BYU L. Rev. 1135, 1139 (2023). The device ‘enables the police to discover’ a car’s ‘navigation data.’ Id. ‘Berla products are not generally available to the public, and sales access is restricted to law enforcement, the military, civil and regulatory agencies, and select private investigation service providers.’ Jones v. Ford Motor Co., 85 F.4th 570, 573 (9th Cir. 2023) (unreported).” Brown v. State, 2025 Md. App. LEXIS 192 (Mar. 10, 2025). [Five years ago, I persuaded a prosecutor to get the GPS information from a rental car seized in a drug case to prove the passenger was just along for the ride and was picked up in Phoenix when the car first left the LAX car rental lot and picked up the drugs in Los Angeles.]

Posted in GPS / Tracking Data | Comments Off on MD: A search warrant for a car’s GPS system

CA2: Exigency of potential destruction of evidence has to be “in real time”

This pro se plaintiff was the subject of a sexual assault investigation that led to officers warrantlessly entering and seizing his home for 12½ hours before getting a warrant. Summary judgment was granted the officers. Exigent circumstances didn’t justify the warrantless entry. For a risk of destruction of evidence, it has to be in “real time.” Also, the officer’s delays in acting belied exigency. Alexander v. City of Syracuse, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6007 (2d Cir. Mar. 14, 2025):*

Continue reading
Posted in Emergency / exigency | Comments Off on CA2: Exigency of potential destruction of evidence has to be “in real time”

D.Minn.: Probable cause for evidence of tax evasion in the home where records would be

Probable cause for evidence of tax evasion in the home where records would be: “Here, the affidavit sought to establish probable cause to believe Mr. Erickson took part in an ongoing scheme to evade paying taxes. Toward that end, the affidavit establishes that Mr. Erickson exercised control over overseas businesses and routed revenue from those businesses to HBH’s United States bank account; that Mr. Erickson did not report all the deposits as income on HBH’s tax returns; and Mr. Erickson’s tax preparers relied on his representations about the nature of those payments as loans. The affidavit also establishes that the affiant corroborated the Informant’s statements related to Mr. Erickson’s tax scheme with emails, bank records, and interviews with Mr. Erickson’s tax preparers and bookkeepers, which show Mr. Erickson took part in the alleged scheme from 2013 until at least 2019. [¶] The fact that the affidavit describes non-criminal behavior does not warrant suppression because ‘[c]orroboration of minor, innocent details can suffice to establish probable cause.’ …” The good faith exception also applies. United States v. Erickson, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46606 (D. Minn. Mar. 14, 2025).*

Witness accounts provided probable cause for a tribal search warrant for evidence of sexual assault of a minor. United States v. Clark, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46599 (D. Minn. Mar. 14, 2025).*

There was probable cause based on informant hearsay here, and defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not making a losing suppression argument. People v. Berry, 2025 NY Slip Op 01523 (4th Dept. Mar. 14, 2025)* (the conviction was March 22, 2017, eight years ago).

Posted in Informant hearsay, Nexus, Probable cause | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Probable cause for evidence of tax evasion in the home where records would be

E.D.Tenn.: Ammunition on the person is PC for firearm in the home

Possession on the person of a significant amount of ammunition was probable cause and nexus to defendant’s house for the firearm. United States v. Partin, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47025 (E.D. Tenn. Mar. 14, 2025).

Probable cause for evidence of bribery in the home: “Here, the warrant affidavit described the totality of the circumstances leading up to law enforcement’s application for the warrant-Mr. Farah’s trial in 22-cr-124; the attempted bribery of Juror #52; Mr. Farah’s nervous conduct in court after the bribery scheme was disclosed; his continued use of and delay in surrendering his cell phone to law enforcement after the phone’s court-ordered seizure; and, importantly, the phone’s apparent resetting to factory settings. Together, these circumstances establish probable cause for Mr. Farah’s suspected involvement in the alleged bribery scheme. The affidavit also explained Mr. Farah’s connection to the residence to be searched stating that the United States Probation and Pretrial Services office reported that Mr. Farah had been living at that address throughout his pretrial release. Finally, the affidavit described, in Attachment B, the specific items inside Mr. Farah’s home which law enforcement sought as evidence of bribery.” The good faith exception also applies. United Sates v. Farah, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46907 (D. Minn. Feb. 24, 2025).*

Posted in Nexus, Probable cause | Comments Off on E.D.Tenn.: Ammunition on the person is PC for firearm in the home

D.N.J.: OSHA site inspection was on a neutral plan and particular

OSHA sought an inspection warrant for a cannabis producer in New Jersey. It was based on a neutral inspection plan [no complaints] and was particular in scope and therefore reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Inspection Warrant, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46978 (D.N.J. Mar. 14, 2025).

“Because Phillips did not make a contemporaneous objection to either the admission of the body-camera footage or the search warrant at trial, his argument on this issue is procedurally barred.” It’s not plain error, either. Phillips v. State, 2025 Miss. LEXIS 69 (Mar. 13, 2025).*

“Daniels asserts on appeal that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file a motion to suppress evidence. Because Daniels’ argument relies upon proof outside of the record, and because he waived his argument when he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered his guilty plea, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed.” State v. Daniels, 2025-Ohio-869 (6th Dist. Mar. 14, 2025).*

Posted in Administrative search, Ineffective assistance, Waiver | Comments Off on D.N.J.: OSHA site inspection was on a neutral plan and particular

IN: Crossing the curtilage to get to defendant’s front door at 11:30 pm violated the Indiana Const.

Crossing the curtilage to get to defendant’s front door at 11:30 pm violated the Indiana Constitution under its Litchfield case. State v. Hendricks, 2025 Ind. App. LEXIS 71 (Mar. 12, 2025).

Defendant parked in a “no parking” zone at the Pittsburgh airport and walked inside. An officer looked in the car and saw an open container and marijuana shake. Defendant was found inside and appeared under the influence. A warrant was obtained for his car and a firearm was found and he was federally indicted. The warrant was with probable cause and there was no materially false statement. United States v. Griffey, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42908 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 10, 2025).*

The automobile exception applied to defendant’s vehicle’s search, and he also fled and abandoned it. United States v. Jimenez-Caraballo, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45833 (D.V.I. Mar. 13, 2025).*

Posted in Abandonment, Curtilage, Reasonable suspicion, State constitution | Comments Off on IN: Crossing the curtilage to get to defendant’s front door at 11:30 pm violated the Indiana Const.

E.D.Mo.: Single image that officer opined was CP is PC

“Under Supreme Court and Eighth Circuit law, Detective Erwin’s professional opinion [based on her experience] that the file contained child pornography was sufficient to establish probable case for the issuance of the search warrant. See Ornelas, 517 U.S. at 700; Mutschelknaus, 592 F.3d at 828-29. The Court therefore rejects this portion of Defendant’s challenge to the sufficiency of probable cause.” “Detective Erwin thus was under no obligation to investigate further, as she possessed a sufficient basis to present the search warrant application to a judge.” A couple of years old possible child pornography picture wasn’t stale: “The Eighth Circuit has recognized ‘“the compulsive nature of the crime of possession of child pornography and the well-established hoarding habits of child pornography collectors.”’ Espinoza, 9 F.4th at 636 …” United States v. Becker, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45912 (E.D. Mo. Jan. 28, 2025).*

“Furthermore, Petitioner has failed to establish that a Fourth Amendment challenge would have been meritorious.” It wouldn’t succeed. Perry v. United States, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42730 (W.D. Tenn. Mar. 10, 2025).*

The CI had been used before, and he reported seeing drugs in defendant’s house within the last 72 hours. All things considered, this was not stale. United States v. Dutton, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5954 (6th Cir. Mar. 11, 2025).*

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Informant hearsay, Probable cause, Staleness | Comments Off on E.D.Mo.: Single image that officer opined was CP is PC

M.D.Fla.: Not IAC to not call private searcher at suppression hearing where it wouldn’t have changed the outcome

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not calling a “hotel maid” who found defendant’s gun at the suppression hearing that led to his ACCA sentence. He doesn’t show that she would have changed the outcome. The private search issue was litigated on the direct appeal. Allen v. United States, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42194 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 10, 2025).

“[W]e find that the court properly denied defendant’s motion to controvert the search warrant because the no-knock provision was authorized based on sufficient information supporting the conclusion that defendant might be present with immediate access to firearms when the search warrant was executed.” People v. McCray, 2025 NY Slip Op 01324 (1st Dept. Mar. 11, 2025).*

The claimant’s claim was properly struck for refusal to answer interrogatories about where the money seized came from. United States v. $1,106,775.00 in United States Currency, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5598 (9th Cir. Mar. 11, 2025).*

Posted in Forfeiture, Ineffective assistance, Knock and announce | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: Not IAC to not call private searcher at suppression hearing where it wouldn’t have changed the outcome

CA9: Jury verdict that officer violated clearly established rights and precluded qualified immunity

One defendant was not entitled to qualified immunity on the merits because the jury found that he violated plaintiff’s clearly established Fourth Amendment right to be free from excessive force by using deadly force when he posed no immediate threat. Est. of Aguirre v. Cty. of Riverside, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5591 (9th Cir. Mar. 11, 2025).

“‘The dispositive question is “whether the violative nature of particular conduct is clearly established.”’ Id. (quoting al-Kidd, 563 U.S. at 742). ‘Such specificity is especially important in the Fourth Amendment context[.]’ Id.” The use of deadly force here was covered by qualified immunity. Rubin v. De La Cruz, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5643 (5th Cir. Mar. 11, 2025).*

Window tint justified the stop. Then the smell of marijuana from the car justified more. United States v. Dumeus, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43302 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 11, 2025).*

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA9: Jury verdict that officer violated clearly established rights and precluded qualified immunity

WA: There was an objective basis for this stop even if with pretext

There was an objective basis for defendant’s stop, even if the officer had subjective motives. State v. Olson, 2025 Wash. App. LEXIS 423 (Mar. 11, 2025).*

Defendant was in prison for about 20 years and there were phone calls between him and his wife. A search warrant for a drug operation was executed at her home. The [thorny] question of his standing to challenge the search of her home when he’s in prison for so long is mooted by finding probable cause, which there clearly was. United States v. Lott, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5701 (11th Cir. Mar. 12, 2025).*

NYC boots and tows vehicles with more than $350 in unpaid parking tickets. Mercedes-Benz Financial has a lien on some of these vehicles. “The ‘towing and impoundment of vehicles’ based on valid parking-and traffic-ticket judgments and authorized under New York City Administrative Code § 19-212 and New York Vehicular & Traffic Law § 237(5) is ‘reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.’” [Citing a bunch of cases.] Mercedes-Benz Fin. Servs. USA, LLC v. City of New York, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43551 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 11, 2025).*

Posted in Pretext, Reasonableness, Standing | Comments Off on WA: There was an objective basis for this stop even if with pretext