A code enforcement officer\u2019s entry onto plaintiff\u2019s construction site to stop work in violation of the city code was not a Fourth Amendment search. And it was otherwise reasonable. Kindle v. Eisert, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 198527 (S.D. Ill. Oct. 31, 2024).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe district court must balance a defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights against the government’s \u2018substantial\u2019 interest in a \u2018proper and effective supervision.\u2019 \u2026 The interest in proper and effective supervision necessitates suspicionless searches here.\u201d United States v. Dority, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 27645 (2d Cir. Oct. 31, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The FBI SWAT team came to defendant\u2019s house to serve a search warrant with an armored vehicle parked outside. He came out backwards as instructed in shorts and a t-shirt. He was told he was free to go. \u201cA reasonable innocent person, told he is free to leave by an FBI Agent, would believe it on the totality of these facts.\u201d United States v. Lightner, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 197806 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 31, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2255 petitioner didn\u2019t plead anything to show that search warrant here was obtained in bad faith or that anything could be suppressed. Molina v. United States, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 197952 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 31, 2024).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A code enforcement officer\u2019s entry onto plaintiff\u2019s construction site to stop work in violation of the city code was not a Fourth Amendment search. And it was otherwise reasonable. Kindle v. Eisert, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 198527 (S.D. Ill. Oct. … Continue reading