Hypothetical future Fourth Amendment injury from a state AG\u2019s civil investigative demand doesn\u2019t confer Art. III standing. Obria Grp., Inc. v. Ferguson, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1166 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 3, 2025).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cHere, a common-sense review of the warrant affidavit shows that the magistrate had a substantial basis to conclude that probable cause existed. While the magistrate could not credit the informant as past-proven reliable, some indicia of the informant’s reliability were present, and independent police work provided a sufficient basis for finding probable cause. Delaware’s decriminalization of marijuana does not require police or magistrates to afford suspects the benefit of the doubt. Finally, there was a sufficient nexus between Defendants’ suspected criminality and the Residence to support a warrant for that address.\u201d State v. Taylor, 2025 Del. Super. LEXIS 4 (Jan. 2, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Petitioner\u2019s proposed successor habeas includes a Fourth Amendment claim which is barred. In re Hensley, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 155 (6th Cir. Jan. 3, 2025).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Hypothetical future Fourth Amendment injury from a state AG\u2019s civil investigative demand doesn\u2019t confer Art. III standing. Obria Grp., Inc. v. Ferguson, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1166 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 3, 2025). \u201cHere, a common-sense review of the warrant affidavit … Continue reading