Defendant’s failure to promptly produce the insurance information and registration on his car justified ordering him out of the car and reasonably extended the stop. United States v. Malone, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188452 (D. Colo. Oct. 16, 2024).*
2254 petitioner seeks a CoA on his search issue, which was held barred below. His ineffective assistance of counsel claim is waived by not asserting it for the CoA. Alvarado v. Lumpkin, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 26165 (5th Cir. Oct. 16, 2024).*
This is a second successive petition alleging the same search issue as before. Denied as the first time, and warned of sanctions if he does it again. In re Blake, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 26159 (5th Cir. Oct. 16, 2024).*
State officers got a state court tracking order for defendant’s car, and he fails to show that it was objectively unreasonable for officers to rely on it in following him. United States v. Taylor, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188612 (W.D. La. Oct. 15, 2024).*
The search warrant for defendant’s phone should have been granted. The application for the first warrant to search failed to establish probable cause. While the officer stated in the affidavit that a quantity of drugs were found in the motel room along with the two phones, he did not explain why the phones likely contained evidence of a crime. People v. Poulos, 2024 NY Slip Op 05152, 2024 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5437 (3d Dept. Oct. 17, 2024).
There was a showing in the affidavit for warrant of nexus between defendant’s cell phone and the crime. United States v. Eason, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188208 (D. Minn. Oct. 15, 2024).*
There were two DNA warrants in this case. The crime lab needed a larger sample for a confirmatory test. That isn’t the issue, however; it’s speedy trial tolled because of that, which it was. McCartney v. State, 2024 Fla. App. LEXIS 8093 (Fla. 3d DCA Oct. 16, 2024).*
Posted inDNA, Nexus, Probable cause|Comments Off on NY3: Cell phones found in proximity to drugs isn’t PC in itself
T.L.O. informs the use of handcuffs in school v. excessive force. Here, the student was objectively enough of a safety risk to justify handcuffs. “Further, because the Fourth Amendment reasonableness inquiry is an objective standard, more discovery to determine Defendants’ subjective knowledge regarding Plaintiffs’ disabilities and behavioral issues or Defendants’ perceptions of the safety threat he posed is unnecessary.” G.D.M. v. City of Oviedo, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188152 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 16, 2024).
The traffic stop of defendant’s car was reasonable, but the officers also had justification that the easily identifiable car (different colored doors from the rest of the car) was a known getaway car. United States v. Rumph, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187945 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 16, 2024).*
Defendant turned over his cell phone while he was being questioned, and then there was probable cause for the warrant for the phone. People v. Gurley, 2024 NY Slip Op 05073 (1st Dept. Oct. 15, 2024).*
There was probable cause for search of the car under the automobile exception so the impoundment and inventory are irrelevant. State v. Baylor, 2024 Iowa App. LEXIS 740 (Oct. 16, 2024).*
Defendant’s car was parked with lights on at night behind another car. There were a string of car break-ins in the area, so the officer decided to stop and approach, smelling marijuana from the car. The driveway was his parents. That justified a search of the car. Approaching the car in his parent’s driveway was not unreasonable. State v. Houston-Polk, 2024 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 456 (Oct. 15, 2024).*
Defendant had drug tested positive on supervised release several times. This probation search was reasonable and justified. United States v. Snuggs, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 26068 (4th Cir. Oct. 16, 2024).*
Defendant abandoned this real property. State v. Moore, 2024 N.C. App. LEXIS 806 (Oct. 15, 2024).
Failure to renew a motion to suppress when the evidence is offered is waiver in this state. State v. Rowdy, 2024 N.C. App. LEXIS 799 (Oct. 15, 2024).*
In executing a warrant for stolen chainsaws, officers can look at all of them to determine which ones are stolen. State v. Rowdy, 2024 N.C. App. LEXIS 799 (Oct. 15, 2024).*
No exigency shown for initial blood draw without a warrant. “In Harris’s case, law enforcement ordered the initial blood draw without waiting for a warrant even though the record shows they could have sought the warrant either electronically or by telephone from the scene, there was a judge on call, and the judge who ultimately issued the warrant lived nearby. Indeed, the judge returned the signed warrant a mere twenty-one minutes after law enforcement finally submitted the application. Most important, the State failed to show—or even posit—that the delay in securing the warrant stemmed from some pressing health, safety, or law enforcement need that reasonably took priority over making a timely warrant application. As such, no exigency justified the warrantless blood draw.” State v. Harris, 2024 Fla. App. LEXIS 8018 (Fla. 2d DCA Oct. 16, 2024).*
With collective knowledge there was reason to extend the stop. United States v. McAliley, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 25982 (3d Cir. Oct. 15, 2024).* (After all, collective knowledge applies to reasonable suspicion too.)
The USMJ’s decision denying the motion to suppress is upheld. There’s no way the officer would have a way of knowing the search warrant was without probable cause, and the good faith exception applies. United States v. Kennedy, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187587 (D. Alaska Oct. 14, 2024).*
Plaintiff’s passive resistance didn’t justify his Tasing. “Considering the totality of the circumstances and the application of the three Graham factors, Sgt. Beasley’s decision to tase Jackson-Gibson was objectively unreasonable. Jackson-Gibson’s alleged crimes were not serious. He did not pose an immediate threat to any officer. And he was not actively resisting or evading arrest. Therefore, the district court did not err in holding that a reasonable jury could find that Sgt. Beasley violated Jackson-Gibson’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from excessive force.” Jackson-Gibson v. Beasley, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 25850 (6th Cir. Oct. 15, 2024).*
The state violated its rule 41 because the return was a year late. The exclusionary rule applies to constitutional violations, not rule violations, and the trial court erred in fashioning its own exclusionary rule here. State v. Nevels, 2024-Ohio-4964, 2024 Ohio App. LEXIS 3701 (3d Dist. Oct. 15, 2024).
“Considering the totality of the circumstances, and giving deference to the issuing magistrate’s decision as required, the Court finds that the search warrant affidavit provided sufficient probable cause that evidence of the alleged crimes — wire fraud and money laundering conspiracy—would be found in Takyi’s Apple accounts. … The evidence thus showed a fraud conspiracy between Boadu, Oduro, Takyi, Ansah, and others.” United States v. Takyi, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186649 (N.D. Ga. Aug. 21, 2024).*
The Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule doesn’t apply to probation violations, and the court declines to apply it to pretext framed as a Rochin “outrage” claim. Commonwealth v. Gelin, 2024 Mass. LEXIS 408 (Oct. 15, 2024).*
There were two DNA samples here. The fact the second was potentially subject to suppression didn’t need to be disclosed in the affidavit for more testing. United States v. Green, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 25836 (2d Cir. Oct. 15, 2024).
Parole officers had detailed information that defendant was leaving his county and storing criminal evidence in another one. They confirmed his movements with his GPS and investigation. Their parole search revealed a key to a storage unit that they got a warrant for. This was all justified and reasonable. United States v. Copper, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185865 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 11, 2024).*
Defendant’s post-conviction ineffective assistance of counsel claim that defense counsel didn’t better exploit an alleged mistake as to dates and times isn’t shown to be prejudicial to him at trial. Austin v. State, 2024 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 448 (Oct. 11, 2024).*
Bloomberg Law: Texas’ 100-Plus Year Investigatory Tool Ruled Unconstitutional by Ryan Autullo (“A federal magistrate judge has struck down a 100-plus year old Texas statute authorizing the state’s attorney general to investigate certain businesses and organizations for violating state laws. Judge Mark Lane of the Western District of Texas said his decision ‘wasn’t that hard’ because Texas’ Request to Examine statute doesn’t expressly allow a served party to pursue pre-compliance judicial review before producing requested records.”)
State law gives parole officers the power to conduct “unannounced visits.” They also don’t have to announce warrantless searches. United States v. McClendon, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186498 (D. Minn. Aug. 15, 2024).*
Defendant’s trembling hands were enough to pass the Rodriguez moment and ask further questions. United States v. Gilbert, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185998 (N.D. Ala. Sep. 16, 2024).*
Defendant ditched his vehicle and fled, thus waiving any reasonable expectation of privacy in it. United States v. Pounds, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186051 (W.D. Okla. Oct. 11, 2024).* (Sounds like one of those motions to suppress where the client insisted on it and refused to listen to reason.)
The dashcam video supports the officer’s stated justification for the stop. State v. Thompkins, 2024-Ohio-4927 (4th Dist. Oct. 3, 2024).*
Police checking the database of Flock’s ALPR for defendant’s license plate revealed only three images in 30 days. The court is not inclined to hold that the mere potential of a Carpenter violation makes one. What happens hereafter might. United States v. Martin, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186377 (E.D. Va. Oct. 11, 2024). The conclusion:
This administrative search was valid. The number of officers showing up to do it isn’t a constitutional question. “Nor does the number of officers conducting the search change the inquiry. Hershner asserts no jurisprudential authority for the proposition that a search may become invalid if it involves too many police officers. Nor are we aware of such authority.” Hershner v. City of Dallas, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 25703 (5th Cir. Oct. 11, 2024).
“Under the totality of the circumstances, the officers had reasonable, articulable suspicion to conduct a protective sweep of Defendant’s residence and lawfully discovered and obtained Defendant’s firearm in plain view during this protective sweep. Additionally, an occupant of the bedroom searched advised that the gun found was not hers but the Defendants. The seized firearm was not the result of an unlawful, warrantless search, and the Defendant’s protections against unreasonable searches and seizures were not violated.” State v. Walker, 2024 Del. Super. LEXIS 683 (Oct. 9, 2024).*
Defendant’s testimony at a bail hearing came in at trial. This Fifth Amendment claim did not violate the Simmons rule on the Fourth Amendment. The issue also isn’t adequately preserved. Turner v. State, 2024 Tex. App. LEXIS 7303 (Tex. App. – Tyler Oct. 9, 2024)* (unpublished) [Admitting ownership of property for a search claim is different than a bail claim. See F.R.E. 104(d) (“Cross-Examining a Defendant in a Criminal Case. By testifying on a preliminary question, a defendant in a criminal case does not become subject to cross-examination on other issues in the case.”).
The exclusionary rule does not apply in pretrial release revocations. Indeed, previously suppressed evidence can be considered on the factors for release. United States v. Cuevas, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185724 (D. Idaho Oct. 9, 2024).
“Assuming without deciding that the Facebook warrant was invalid, we conclude that the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule applies. The Facebook warrant was not ‘so facially deficient’ that no reasonable officer could have relied on its validity. … On the contrary, the warrant was sufficiently particularized as it was cabined to ascertaining location data associated with a single Facebook account over a 30-day period.” United States v. Perkins, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 25680 (4th Cir. Oct. 11, 2024).*
Plaintiff’s complaint the CIA was surveilling him fails for lack of specificity as to when, where, and how. Story v. CIA, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185671 (N.D.N.Y. Oct. 10, 2024).*
State law enforcement officers investigated a murder on the Muscogee Creek Reservation which at the time was not necessarily legal but two years later was not. The murder was prosecuted in federal court. There is no dispute the officers lacked jurisdiction. The exclusionary rule will not be applied because the officers did nothing constitutionally wrong. United States v. Little, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 25639 (10th Cir. Oct. 11, 2024) (After all, the bottom line is “reasonableness,” and it can’t be said this was unreasonable.):
Posted inExclusionary rule, Reasonableness|Comments Off on CA10: State officers investigating murder on an Indian reservation without jurisdiction does not lead to suppression of evidence
The exclusionary rule doesn’t apply to civil cases, here an action over who gets possession of neglected animals. State ex rel. Dunn v. Connelly, 2024 Conn. App. LEXIS 268 (Oct. 8, 2024).
This is a DUI on federal property. Even if the Georgia implied consent law wasn’t exactly applied, it doesn’t matter under the federal statute. United States v. Raleigh, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185544 (S.D. Ga. Oct. 10, 2024).*
“It is not clear why any plaintiff’s lawyer would bring this action. The Fourth Amendment claim presents a classic case of officers having to make a call in the field about who to believe and who not to believe. The overwhelming weight of the field evidence supported the officers’ call. The First Amendment claim is equally without substance as defendants had an obvious legitimate penological objective in keeping plaintiff in shackles at the hospital. Whether plaintiff thinks he is pursuing justice or compensation or both, he should have been talked out of bringing this case because this unfortunate family has enough problems without having to assume the additional burden of non-viable litigation.” S.M.N. Islam v. Tirelli, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185559 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 10, 2024).*
Posted inExclusionary rule, Reasonableness|Comments Off on CT: Exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in civil cases, here one over animal neglect
Police searched defendant’s car at the impound lot, and he was sent certified mail to tell him to pick it up or it would be disposed of. They mailed it to his house while he was in jail so he never knew about it. He moved to suppress everything about the vehicle for the police having disposed of it. The court, however, found this all a result of negligence, not bad faith, and refused to suppress. “This court does not condone the State’s destruction of potentially useful evidence in this case. But after a careful review, we conclude that the destruction was the result of negligence, not bad faith. In simple terms, it seems that the left hand just did not know what the right hand was doing.” State v. Griffin, 2024-Ohio-4894, 2024 Ohio App. LEXIS 3655 (8th Dist. Oct. 8, 2024).
Defendant’s late 2255 based on police misconduct involves an appellate waiver. Moreover, it doesn’t satisfy the actual innocence requirements. United States v. Baker, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185403 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 10, 2024).*
A tattoo search in prison to identify gang members was reasonable and here lasted 30 seconds. Golden v. Ohio Dep’t of Rehab., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185400 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 10, 2024).*
Posted inPretext, Privileges|Comments Off on The Conversation: Police stop more Black drivers, while speed cameras issue unbiased tickets − new study from Chicago
"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.
