{"id":55761,"date":"2023-09-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2023-09-03T05:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=55761"},"modified":"2023-09-02T17:14:18","modified_gmt":"2023-09-02T22:14:18","slug":"tx1-sw-for-cell-phone-in-jail-property-room-was-not-stale","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=55761","title":{"rendered":"TX1: SW for cell phone in jail property room was not stale"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The search warrant for defendant\u2019s cell phone in a burglary case was not based on stale information. She was in custody and her phone was in her property. Cell phone information is enduring. Veal v. State<\/a>, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 6861 (Tex. App. \u2013 Houston (1st Dist.) Aug. 31, 2023).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cPolice officers Michael Curtis and Kyle Gray responded to a 911 call reporting a domestic dispute. When they arrived at the reported location, all was quiet, and they could not detect any signs of an altercation. The officers knocked on Robert Reed’s front door. After a brief verbal exchange, Reed refused to engage further with the officers because they did not have a warrant. The officers then broke down Reed’s front door, pointed a gun at his head, and removed him from his home. Reed filed a suit against the officers in their official and individual capacities under 42 U.S.C. \u00a7 1983. Upon motions for summary judgment, the district court denied the officers qualified immunity for Reed’s Fourth Amendment claims of unlawful entry, false arrest, and excessive force. We AFFIRM the district court’s denial of qualified immunity.\u201d Reed v. Campbell Cty., 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 22946 (6th Cir. Aug. 30, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There was reasonable suspicion for defendant\u2019s probation search. United States v. Teston, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153339 (D.N.M. Aug. 28, 2023).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The search warrant for defendant\u2019s cell phone in a burglary case was not based on stale information. She was in custody and her phone was in her property. Cell phone information is enduring. Veal v. State, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,58,40,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-55761","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cell-phones","category-probationparole-search","category-qualified-immunity","category-staleness"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/55761","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=55761"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/55761\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":55762,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/55761\/revisions\/55762"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=55761"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=55761"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=55761"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}