\u201cThe plaintiff similarly alleges that Miller forged a judge’s signature on a search warrant. But he does not say anything else about this search warrant. Did law enforcement execute the search warrant? What, or where, did they search? Did they find or seize anything? Did prosecutors use any seized evidence against the plaintiff at his trial? The complaint does not answer any of these questions. Without additional detail about this alleged forged signature, the court cannot determine whether Miller may have violated the plaintiff’s rights. The plaintiff may not proceed on this claim.\u201d Bailey v. Weiland, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 217186 (E.D. Wis. Dec. 2, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s motion to suppress search of another\u2019s cell phone under California Electronic Communications Privacy Act (CalECPA; Pen. Code, \u00a7 1546 et seq.) is denied because the other is dead and has no interest anymore. People v. Clymer, 2024 Cal. App. LEXIS 778 (1st Dist. Dec. 4, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The stop of the car defendant was riding in was objectively lawful. Then marijuana was smelled. State v. Gale, 2024 Iowa App. LEXIS 856 (Dec. 4, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A change in search and seizure substantive law a decade ago doesn\u2019t justify a sentence reduction from before. United States v. Ugochukwu, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218929 (N.D. Ohio Dec. 3, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cThe plaintiff similarly alleges that Miller forged a judge’s signature on a search warrant. But he does not say anything else about this search warrant. Did law enforcement execute the search warrant? What, or where, did they search? Did they … Continue reading