“In similar situations to the second transaction, federal courts have upheld the validity of the warrant to search a drug dealer’s premises based on the ‘common sense’ inference that drugs would be found in the home, essentially finding that evidence of the defendant leaving the house, directly proceeding to the site of the drug buy, and then immediately returning to the same house demonstrates that the house was essentially used as the defendant’s base of operations. [citations omitted] Harris has not discussed nor given any reasons to distinguish that line of authority, especially as it pertains to the second controlled buy. Harris’s avoidance of discussing the totality of the case authority surrounding the Fourth Amendment and controlled-buy transactions limits our review.” State v. Harris, 2024-Ohio-5807 (8th Dist. Dec. 12, 2024).*
“There are three recognized ways a plaintiff can show that a law is clearly established. … First, by pointing to a case with materially similar facts decided by the Supreme Court, the Eleventh Circuit, or the highest court of the relevant state. … Second, by showing ‘a broader, clearly established principle should control the novel facts in this situation.’ … This principle must be ‘specific enough to give the officers notice of the clearly established right.’ … Finally, ‘the plaintiff can show that the conduct at issue so obviously violated the Constitution that prior case law is unnecessary.’” Plaintiff fails to show a constitutional violation or that it was clearly established. Metz v. Bridges, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 31566 (11th Cir. Dec. 12, 2024).*
NYTimes: Mount Vernon Police’s Strip Searches Were Unconstitutional, U.S. Says by Alyce McFadden (”A report by federal prosecutors found that a Westchester County police department violated the Fourth Amendment ‘on an enormous scale.’ [¶] Two women, 65 and 75 years old, were taken to a police station in Mount Vernon, N.Y., after a traffic stop in 2020. Officers instructed both women to undress. Then they were told to bend over and cough. [¶] Neither woman was arrested, and an investigation determined there had been no basis for the traffic stop in the first place. One of the women said she had been left ‘very humiliated’ and ‘on the verge of fainting’ from fear after the invasive search, commonly used in drug arrests. [¶] The encounter is just one example of a long-running pattern of improper strip searches conducted by the police department in Mount Vernon, in Westchester County, according to a report released Thursday by the Department of Justice and the U.S. attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York.”)
Posted inStrip search|Comments Off on NYTimes: Mount Vernon Police’s Strip Searches Were Unconstitutional, U.S. Says
Just because defendant was a suspected drug dealer, there wasn’t probable cause for searching his cell phone. “While [officer] Bruno recounted that there was a quantity of drugs found in the motel room, along with the two phones, he did not explain why the phones likely contained evidence of a crime. Although common sense and experience might suggest that cell phones found in the same room as a quantity of drugs could potentially contain evidence related to the sale of those drugs, ‘common sense alone does not establish probable cause to search a person’s cell phone.’” People v. Poulos, 2024 NY Slip Op 06239, 2024 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6627 (3d Dept. Dec. 12, 2024).
Plaintiff was validly stopped for walking on the wrong side of the road, and the situation devolved into an excessive force claim for which the officers get qualified immunity. Martinez v. City of Rosenberg, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 31477 (5th Cir. Dec. 11, 2024).*
2254 petitioner’s Fourth Amendment habeas claim is barred by Stone. Eisenmann v. Thornell, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 224260 (D. Ariz. Dec. 10, 2024).*
The 911 tip here was corroborated by officers when they arrived. That was reasonable suspicion. United States v. Flournah, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 224459 (M.D. Ga. Dec. 11, 2024).*
A dog sniff at the door to a rented commercial storage unit violated no reasonable expectation of privacy. United States v. Harris, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 224506 (W.D. La. Nov. 4, 2024).
There’s no reasonable expectation of privacy in one’s IP address, so defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not challenging the government’s acquiring it. Schmeling v. United States, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 31511 (6th Cir. Dec. 11, 2024).*
The smell of marijuana justified extending the stop. United States v. Delgado, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 224175 (D.S.C. Dec. 11, 2024).*
Defendant’s probation search claims were never presented in a motion to suppress so they’re waived. Hill v. State, 2024 Ark. App. 613 (Dec. 11, 2024).*
After an accident in South Arkansas, defendant was airlifted to a hospital in Shreveport, Louisiana. A search warrant in Louisiana was issued for his medical records. There was no requirement that an Arkansas judge issue a warrant first, just so a Louisiana judge could. Also, a blood sample was seized not specified in the warrant, but it was later validly searched with a warrant. The officers acted in good faith. Nowlin v. State, 2024 Ark. App. 607 (Dec. 11, 2024). [This isn’t new. Texarkana TX/AR sees this all the time. The trauma center is on the Texas side of the city.]
The affidavit for arrest warrant here was based on probable cause. United States v. Shain, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 223586 (D. Mont. Dec. 10, 2024).*
One of defendant’s brake lights was out and that justified the stop. United States v. Porter, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 223688 (D. Md. Dec. 10, 2024).*
The alleged unconstitutional motive for plaintiff’s arrest is irrelevant where there was an objective basis. Green v. Sec. Assurance Mgmt., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 223793 (D.D.C. Dec. 11, 2024).*
Defendant was arrested in Malaysia and a computer and cell phones were seized. He was then indicted in NYC. The nine-day delay in getting a warrant was not unreasonable considering defendant was in custody and unable to use them. A stay of execution of the warrant is denied. He’s been indicted, and there was probable cause. The only case he cites doesn’t provide any support for its rationale, plus it was pre-indictment. United States v. Hiya, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222422 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 6, 2024).
Amazon has surveillance equipment in delivery vans, and plaintiff’s was hit by a train. Amazon released the video publicly, and plaintiff sued claiming a violation of state law. He had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the van. Evans v. Amazon.Com, Inc., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 223002 (E.D. Wis. Dec. 10, 2024).*
Search incident doesn’t require proof of actual exigency. State v. Duffee, 2024 Ore. App. LEXIS 1686 (Dec. 11, 2024).*
The affiant’s failure to cross-reference information in the file was “regrettable” but insufficient for a Franks violation. Burgos v. United States, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 223456 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 10, 2024).*
Months of electronic surveillance gave probable cause for defendant’s stop and search. Police use of a cover story for the stop was reasonable to prevent other co-conspirators from finding out. United States v. Arrington, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222969 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 10, 2024).
There was reasonable suspicion for defendant’s stop for parking in a fire lane, but not for drinking in a vehicle. United States v. Morgan, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222886 (D. Md. Dec. 9, 2024).*
The 48 hour P&A rule was violated, but there was no prejudice. Perez v. Pallares, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 223254 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 9, 2024).*
As defendant drove, the temporary tag was lifted by the air flow and was thus unreadable. That was reasonable suspicion for a stop, even though the tag was visible when he stopped. State v. Gaither, 2024-Ohio-5777 (7th Dist. Dec. 5, 2024).*
In an electronic search, the government copied the device’s memory for later search, and the probable cause did not get stale during the delay. Because of the capacity of electronic devices, this is the most efficient manner of searching. United States v. Chenguang Gong, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 223050 (D. Mass. Dec. 10, 2024):
Plaintiff’s takedown was lawful, but not the assault after he was down. “It is even more clearly established now. A suspect’s ‘right[] to be free from excessive force [is] violated if officers choke, kick, or punch [him] when [he is] restrained, not fighting, and not resisting.’ Tatum v. Robinson, 858 F.3d 544, 552 (8th Cir. 2017) … With Tatum on the books nearly a year earlier, Officers Beeman and Gugliano would have ‘known for certain that the[ir] conduct was unlawful’ and that, once they crossed the line identified in that case, they would no longer be ‘immune from liability’ no matter how many expletives came their way. Ziglar v. Abbasi, 582 U.S. 120, 152 (2017); see Shannon, 616 F.3d at 865.” Cartia v. Beeman, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 31211 (8th Cir. Dec. 10, 2024).
There was no reasonable suspicion defendant was armed just because he was slow getting out of his car and some ambiguous movements inside. United States v. Galindo, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222544 (N.D.W. Va. Dec. 9, 2024).*
Plaintiff was shot in the back while holding a bike lock, not a weapon. Questions of fact remain and summary judgment for the defense is inappropriate. Elena v. Jones, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 31172 (9th Cir. Dec. 9, 2024).*
“Our precedent holds that it was clearly established that an officer may not arrest an individual based solely on an eyewitness account that is untruthful or unreliable. That is exactly what happened here when Officer Wieber learned that the prior trespasser had not returned to the house as the neighbor stated but proceeded to arrest plaintiffs anyway. Wieber’s actions violated plaintiffs’ clearly established constitutional rights.” Brown v. City of Wyoming, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 31173 (6th Cir. Dec. 9, 2024).
“Accordingly, the right to be protected under the Fourth Amendment from malicious prosecution was not clearly established at the time the individual Defendants participated in Garcia’s arrest and prosecution. … Because it would not have been clear to Defendants that their conduct violated the Fourth Amendment’s protection against malicious prosecution in 2017 and 2018, they are entitled to summary judgment based on their qualified immunity as to Garcia’s malicious-prosecution claim.” Garcia v. Bexar Co., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222243 (W.D. Tex. Dec. 9, 2024);* Salazar v. Bexar Cty., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222244 (W.D. Tex. Dec. 9, 2024).*
404 Media: Location Data Firm Offers to Help Cops Track Targets via Doctor Visits by Joseph Cox (“A location data company is asking police for the address of specific people’s doctors in case that can be useful in finding their mobile phone in a massive set of peoples’ location data, according to a document provided to U.S. law enforcement and obtained by 404 Media. The document is a ‘Project Intake Form’ that asks police for information about the person of interest they would like to track, such as biographical information and known locations, including family and friends’ addresses and doctors offices they may visit. It shows that, in a time when surveillance of abortion and reproductive health clinics could rise in a post-Roe America, companies providing monitoring tools to the government are prepared to use healthcare information to track down targets. The company is called Fog Data Science, and its product uses location data harvested from smartphones either through ordinary apps or the advertising ecosystem.”)
Posted inSurveillance technology|Comments Off on 404 Media: Location Data Firm Offers to Help Cops Track Targets via Doctor Visits
“The drug dog’s fleeting touch of the passenger door and de minimus intrusion into the vehicle cabin through a window left open by a passenger does not justify the exclusion of evidence under the Supreme Court’s Fourth Amendment jurisprudence.” It also didn’t violate the state constitution. State v. Mumford, 2024 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 99 (Dec. 6, 2024).
The drug dog here was asked to sniff from a higher position and put his paws on the side of the car. His snout broke the plane of the window, but this was not an unreasonable intrusion because it was instinctive. United States v. Fellmy, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222155 (E.D. Ky. Dec. 9, 2024).
A drug dog putting his paws on a vehicle is not an unreasonable search. United States v. Keller, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 31098 (5th Cir. Dec. 9, 2024).
Posted inDog sniff|Comments Off on Drug dog nose into a car window
The state failed to put on proof of the impoundment and inventory policy, so the trial court erred in finding it was reasonable. Commonwealth v. Brinson, 2024 PA Super 293, 2024 Pa. Super. LEXIS 536 (Dec. 9, 2024).
Defendant’s car had been shot up and left in a business parking lot with the window down. “Using a license plate reader, McCarthy tracked the Charger’s movements, confirming it was in the vicinity at the time of the shooting. … This information was obtained on the night of the incident and confirmed the Charger’s presence near the reported gunfire.” It was also owned by somebody else. It was found to be abandoned, and thus there was no standing in the car. There were also two cell phones left in the car. United States v. Bradley, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 221762 (W.D. La. Nov. 18, 2024).*
“Additionally, the exclusionary rule does not apply to sentencing proceedings, and evidence seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment can be considered at sentencing as long as it is reliable. United States v. Jackson, 713 F. App’x 963, 968 (11th Cir. 2017) (per curiam) (citing United States v. Lynch, 934 F.2d 1226, 1235-37 (11th Cir. 1991)).” Tolbert v. United States, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 221853 (S.D. Ala. Nov. 4, 2024).*
Defendant shipped a car on a car hauler paying in advance. All things considered, the hauler suspected drugs were involved because it had happened to him before. He called HSI which came to investigate. On the totality, there was probable cause that the car had drugs in it when it was searched. Even on the car hauler trailer, it was “inherently mobile” for the automobile exception to apply. United States v. Mims, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 31017 (8th Cir. Dec. 9, 2024).
There was reasonable suspicion for continuing the stop in this case because of defendant’s movements and words. The officer finally called in a drug dog because defendant didn’t know whether there would be drugs in his car. Suppression order reversed. State v. Tannehill, 2024 OK CR 32, 2024 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 30 (Dec. 5, 2024).*
Plaintiff’s Bivens false arrest claim fails on merits because of probable cause. Lynch v. United States, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 30973 (7th Cir. Dec. 5, 2024).*
Calling 911 that the child you’re caring for OD’ed on your fentanyl is consent to their emergency entry. State v. Gothberg, 2024 ND 217, 2024 N.D. LEXIS 221 (Dec. 5, 2024).
2255 petitioner pled guilty knowing the facts of the search claim, and it’s waived for even ineffective assistance. Also, he can’t show he’d have prevailed. McFadden v. United States, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 221200 (E.D. Tenn. Dec. 6, 2024).*
Here there was a dog sniff warrant, and the factual basis for it justifies the good faith exception. United States v. Williams, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220797 (D. Minn. Dec. 6, 2024).*
Petitioner’s successive habeas claim about a search claim is barred because what’s raised doesn’t comply with the statute on successor petitions. In re George, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 30961 (11th Cir. Dec. 6, 2024).*
Defendant was essentially a squatter who was wrongfully on the premises and had no standing. The owner lived on the second floor, and he squatted on the first floor for months. The building was condemned. His claim the owner’s tolerating him staying conferred standing is rejected. United States v. Lowe, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 221132 (E.D. Mo. Dec. 6, 2024).
There was plenty for the showing of probable cause for this warrant such that the good faith exception would apply anyway. The defendant can’t show any of the predicates of Leon for overcoming the good faith exception apply here. State v. Cheley, 2024 La. App. LEXIS 2095 (La. App. 3 Cir Dec. 4, 2024).*
The video shows that the amount of force used on a resisting detainee was reasonable under the circumstances. Johnson v. Smith, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220936 (E.D. La. Dec. 6, 2024).*
Defendant had a dashcam, and the officer got a warrant for it. While the video was bad, the audio supported the basis for the stop. State v. Callahan, 2024 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 546 (Dec. 6, 2024).*
There was reasonable suspicion for defendant’s stop for theft from a vehicle. United States v. Morrison, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 30713 (3d Cir. Dec. 5, 2024).*
It was a year between indictment and defendant seeking expansive discovery underlying his Playpen warrant, and discovery is denied. It’s too late and likely wouldn’t matter. United States v. Knight, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 30830 (9th Cir. Dec. 4, 2024).*
Defendant’s stop was with reasonable suspicion he was a shoplifter stuffing tequila down his pants. United States v. Duncan, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 30890 (9th Cir. Dec. 6, 2024).*
ABAJ: What laws could Trump invoke to fast track deportations? by Debra Cassens Weiss (“‘The Insurrection Act does not (and could not) authorize the violation of constitutional rights,’ she writes. ‘For instance, if soldiers deployed under the Insurrection Act searched homes without a warrant or an applicable exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement, courts could intervene. Prolonged military detention under the Insurrection Act would similarly be subject to constitutional challenge.’” And the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the military from civilian law enforcement.) And the military is trained on the Fourth Amendment?
Posted inImmigration arrests|Comments Off on ABAJ: What laws could Trump invoke to fast track deportations?
The VI code and rules of criminal procedure provide for electronic monitoring as a condition of pretrial release. GPS tracking is a search and involves a person’s reasonable expectation of privacy and would be reasonable if justified. Here it was consented to. Berthier v. People of the V.I., 2024 VI 35, 2024 V.I. Supreme LEXIS 39 (Dec. 5, 2024).
Defendant’s stop was based on a window tint violation which the trial court didn’t find credible. Then the stop was unreasonably extended when the officer thought defendant was someone else they were interest in but he wasn’t. State v. Mathis, 2024-Ohio-5707 (8th Dist. Dec. 5, 2024).*
“[W]hile there was a misleading statement in an affidavit, Defendant falls short of making a substantial preliminary showing that the misrepresentation amounted to a deliberate falsehood or reckless disregard for the truth. Additionally, Defendant fails to make a substantial preliminary showing that the misleading statement was material to the Magistrate Judge’s finding of probable cause.” United States v. Amado, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219893 (D. Conn. Dec. 4, 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.
