404 Media: FBI Couldn’t Get into WaPo Reporter’s iPhone Because It Had Lockdown Mode Enabled

Posted on February 6, 2026 by Hall

404 Media: FBI Couldn’t Get into WaPo Reporter’s iPhone Because It Had Lockdown Mode Enabled by Joseph Cox (“Lockdown Mode is a sometimes overlooked feature of Apple devices that broadly make them harder to hack. A court record indicates the feature might be effective at stopping third parties unlocking someone’s device. At least for now.”)

Posted in Cell phones | Comments Off on 404 Media: FBI Couldn’t Get into WaPo Reporter’s iPhone Because It Had Lockdown Mode Enabled

CA10: Inconsistency in travel plans isn’t RS per se; officer has to see that they’re lying

Posted on February 6, 2026 by Hall

Inconsistency in travel plans alone isn’t reasonable suspicion to extend a vehicle stop. The officer has to conclude that one of the occupants was lying about plans. “A trooper can reasonably suspect criminal activity when a driver and passenger lie about their travel plans. … But arguable inconsistencies may sometimes be innocent: A person might mishear a trooper’s question, might think the travel plans are none of the trooper’s business, might misremember details of a trip, or might be confused. See United States v. Santos, 403 F.3d 1120, 1131-32 (10th Cir. 2005) (discussing innocent explanations for inconsistencies in travel plans). When an inconsistency indisputably shows that the driver or passenger is lying, a trooper’s suspicion may be reasonable. United States v. Wallace, 429 F.3d 969, 976 (10th Cir. 2005).” United States v. Robbins, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 3621 (10th Cir. Feb. 5, 2026).

A revocation petition’s affirmation of the truth of what was pled satisfied the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Jimenez, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22486 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 3, 2026).*

Defendant’s post-conviction petition over his alleged illegal search was years out of time. State v. Davis, 2026 Del. Super. LEXIS 54 (Feb. 1, 2026).*

Posted in Neutral and detached magistrate, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on CA10: Inconsistency in travel plans isn’t RS per se; officer has to see that they’re lying

CT: Last person to contact victim alive was PC for his phone

Posted on February 5, 2026 by Hall

Defendant was sexually involved with the victim, and he apparently was the last person to see her alive, and had contact with her after she disappeared. That was probable cause. State v. Johnson, 2026 Conn. LEXIS 19 (Feb. 3, 2026).

Defendant lost in state court on his Fourth Amendment claim, so there’s no ineffective assistance of counsel claim in habeas. Cunningham v. Cargor, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22217 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 3, 2026).*

Defendant seen alleged to be burning clothes he wore in a robbery in his grill in his yard was not protected because it could be seen from off the property. United States v. Flounoury, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22269 (D. Mass. Jan. 21, 2026).*

Posted in Cell phones, Ineffective assistance, Probable cause, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on CT: Last person to contact victim alive was PC for his phone

CA5: Cardiac arrest during police training wasn’t a 4A seizure

Posted on February 5, 2026 by Hall

“Appellant Brittney Kennedy appeals the dismissal of constitutional claims she brought on behalf of her deceased husband, Marquis Kennedy, who suffered a cardiac arrest after a self-defense simulation for police-cadet training. She claims the district court erred by concluding that the training exercise involved no constitutional seizure and that the officers owed Marquis no constitutional duty of medical care. [¶] Marquis’s death is a tragedy, above all for his surviving wife and child. Like the district court, however, we cannot find any plausible allegation that the defendants violated the Constitution. Accordingly, we AFFIRM.” Kennedy v. City of Arlington, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 3535 (5th Cir. Feb. 4, 2026).*

There’s a fact dispute on the reasonableness of force, so no qualified immunity. Lewis v. Nanos, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 3479 (9th Cir. Feb. 4, 2026).*

Plaintiff’s arrest at a Salvation Army conference room wasn’t in his residence, although he stayed there. Walker v. Gatsios, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 3416 (7th Cir. Feb. 2, 2026).*

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Qualified immunity, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Seizure | Comments Off on CA5: Cardiac arrest during police training wasn’t a 4A seizure

E.D.Pa.: Flight after police came after def was not quite Wardlaw’s “headlong flight”

Posted on February 5, 2026 by Hall

Being in a high crime area means less when defendant is doing nothing wrong. Defendant didn’t run away from officers until they came after him. It’s kind of provoked flight, not Wardlow’s “headlong flight.” On the totality, there was no reasonable suspicion, and the motion to suppress is granted. United States v. Springs, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22747 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 4, 2026).*

The officer gave the PBT to placate the victim, not because he thought defendant was actually impaired. Still, “Viewed in their totality, and in light of the low standard for reasonable suspicion, the facts presented in this case provide a particularized and objective basis for suspecting that Lorsung was driving while impaired.” Lorsung v. Comm’r of Pub. Safety, 2026 Minn. LEXIS 52 (Feb. 4, 2026).*

Defendant’s new crime after his allegedly unreasonably extended stop wouldn’t be suppressed. State v. Mire, 2026 Wisc. App. LEXIS 122 (Feb. 4, 2026).*

Posted in Attenuation, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on E.D.Pa.: Flight after police came after def was not quite Wardlaw’s “headlong flight”

CA11: The general 48-hour rule for first appearances doesn’t apply to non-citizens arrested at sea

Posted on February 5, 2026 by Hall

The general 48-hour rule for first appearances doesn’t apply to non-citizens arrested at sea. United States v. Dominguez, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 3529 (11th Cir. Feb. 4, 2026).

“Because the 911 caller’s information did not describe conduct that was obviously criminal, Romero Gonzalez argues that the information did not provide reasonable suspicion to support the stop. We disagree. [¶] The 911 caller reported yelling and screaming coming from the truck parked next to her, accompanied by motions variously described as ‘hitting,’ ‘kicking,’ and ‘swatting’ that were violent enough to cause the truck to visibly rock. This information suggested the possibility that an assault was underway in the truck. Moreover, the screaming and hitting stopped as soon as the caller turned on the lights to her car, and the back-seat passenger stared at the caller as she was driving out of the parking area. Because an experienced officer could reasonably view these actions as showing a consciousness of guilt, they provided additional reasons to believe that an assault may be underway.” United States v. Gonzalez, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 3500 (4th Cir. Feb. 4, 2026).*

Posted in Foreign searches, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA11: The general 48-hour rule for first appearances doesn’t apply to non-citizens arrested at sea

ID: There is no legal privilege in pharmacy records

Posted on February 5, 2026 by Hall

There is no legal privilege in pharmacy records. Pharmacists are independent actors in the medical field. The trial court erred in granting a motion in limine. Just because a psychotherapist prescribed a drug isn’t privileged. State v. Borek, 2026 Ida. LEXIS 21 (Feb. 4, 2026).

The officer passing defendant’s parked vehicle rolled down his window and smelled burning marijuana. That was plain smell and wasn’t a search. United States v. Fudge, No. 8:25CR164, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22150 (D. Neb. Jan. 9, 2026).*

“Once a traffic stop is lawful, officers may order the driver to exit the vehicle without violating the Fourth Amendment. Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106, 111 (1977); …” State v. Campbell, 2026-Ohio-335 (5th Dist. Feb. 3, 2026).*

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Privileges, Reasonable suspicion, Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off on ID: There is no legal privilege in pharmacy records

N.Y.Co.: Installing software on a cell phone to protect its data before search wasn’t unreasonable

Posted on February 5, 2026 by Hall

“The Court is further unpersuaded by the Defendant’s assertion that the installation of software, aimed at preserving evidence rather than conducting a search, on the Defendant’s cellphone was an improper or unconstitutional intrusion. The manner in which law enforcement handled the Defendant’s cellphone after his arrest constituted reasonable steps to preserve data and prevent the locking or encryption of same.” People v. Martinez, 2026 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 340 (N.Y. Co. Jan. 30, 2026).

Reason to believe there’s a gun on the car with a felon is probable cause. State v. Rogers, 2026 Mo. LEXIS 31 (Feb. 3, 2026).*

The traffic stop was objectively reasonable, albeit pretextual for drugs. United States v. Harbach, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21903 (N.D. Iowa Feb. 3, 2026).*

There was a substantial basis for finding probable cause for the warrant here, and staleness didn’t apply because it was shown to be an ongoing drug operation. United States v. Brown, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22135 (W.D.N.Y. Feb. 3, 2026).*

Posted in Pretext, Probable cause, Staleness | Comments Off on N.Y.Co.: Installing software on a cell phone to protect its data before search wasn’t unreasonable

MT: When officers lawfully get ID, they can run it

Posted on February 5, 2026 by Hall

Running defendant’s name after lawfully asking for ID led to a warrant, and it was all reasonable. State v. Fish, 2026 MT 12 (Feb. 3, 2026)*:

At no point during his interaction with Fish did Deputy Kammerzell breach the Fourth Amendment’s or Article II, Section 11’s prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures. Deputy Kammerzell approached Fish as a community caretaker with particularized suspicion to investigate a possible criminal trespass. Furthermore, the circumstances necessitated that Deputy Kammerzell document Fish’s identity to check whether he had been previously evicted, and to document the notice in case Fish came back to Windiggers [a bar] after his privilege to be on the premises was revoked. Once dispatch informed Deputy Kammerzell of the warrant, further particularized suspicion arose justifying the prolonged seizure of Fish until dispatch was able to confirm its existence.

Posted in Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on MT: When officers lawfully get ID, they can run it

N.D.Ind.: Alleged sexual assault during citizen ride along stated 4A claim

Posted on February 5, 2026 by Hall

Alleged sexual assault during a citizen ride along in a police car stated a Fourth Amendment claim. Hess v. Garcia, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22018 (N.D. Ind. Feb. 3, 2026).

“Based on our precedent involving the use of pepper spray, we agree that Officer Irvine’s conduct was neither objectively unreasonable nor excessive.” Diehl v. United States, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 3387 (11th Cir. Feb. 3, 2026).*

Plaintiff did not plausibly allege a Fourth Amendment violation because there was a basis for his stop and inventory of his car. Harris v. City of Bloomington, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 3394 (7th Cir. Feb. 3, 2026).*

Under Wallace, plaintiff’s pretrial Fourth Amendment claims against state charges are stayed. Scott v. St. Charles Par., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21773 (E.D. La. Feb. 3, 2026).*

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Pretext, Seizure | Comments Off on N.D.Ind.: Alleged sexual assault during citizen ride along stated 4A claim

GA: Visitor has no REP in common areas of host’s home

Posted on February 5, 2026 by Hall

The MV’s grandmother suspected defendant was molesting her granddaughter. She placed a video camera in the living room. It was obvious with a red light on it, and there was a sign that a camera was in use. He moved to suppress under state law that this was a recording in a private place. As to him, this was not a private place where he had no reasonable expectation of privacy. “Generally a visitor has no expectation of privacy in the common area of someone else’s home.” Pamplin v. State, 2026 Ga. App. LEXIS 60 (Feb. 3, 2026).

Neither the exclusionary rule nor a harassment exception applies to supervised release. United States v. Velazquez, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21748 (D. Utah Feb. 2, 2026).*

There was probable cause for the stop itself and then reasonable suspicion for a protective sweep under the seat of the car. United States v. Valentin, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21851 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 3, 2026).*

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Protective sweep, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Standing | Comments Off on GA: Visitor has no REP in common areas of host’s home

CNS: House Democrats demand DHS scrap memo allowing warrantless entry of homes

Posted on February 5, 2026 by Hall

CNS: House Democrats demand DHS scrap memo allowing warrantless entry of homes by Benjamin S. Weiss (“House Democrats demanded the Department of Homeland Security rescind a controversial directive allowing federal immigration agents to forcibly enter people’s homes without a signed warrant from a judge, following the leak of a memorandum detailing the agency’s broad assertion of law enforcement authority. Lawmakers say the memo took ‘a battering ram’ to the Constitution and the Fourth Amendment’s protections against unreasonable search and seizure — and pushed back on the Trump administration’s claims that non-U.S. citizens are not subject to those rights.”)

Posted in immigration searches | Comments Off on CNS: House Democrats demand DHS scrap memo allowing warrantless entry of homes

ID: Potential for destruction of evidence on cell phone was justification for its seizure

Posted on February 5, 2026 by Hall

Defendant was reported for video voyeurism of his stepdaughter in the bathroom, and police got his phone, telling him they were seizing it. Then they got a warrant. The potential for destruction of evidence was sufficient justification for a warrantless seizure. State v. Smith, 2026 Ida. LEXIS 20 (Feb. 3, 2026).

Defendant’s Franks challenge fails for lack of materiality or that it was a reasonable mistake at worst. All things considered, he couldn’t win on the merits of a suppression motion. United States v. Robinson, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21508 (E.D. Ky. Jan. 26, 2026).*

After a dog alert on his cell, plaintiff was subjected to a strip search, body cavity search, and body scan, and all this was reasonable. His strip search in front of other inmates wasn’t unreasonable. Sainiak v. Newberry, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21614 (M.D. Pa. Feb. 3, 2026).*

Posted in Cell phones, Emergency / exigency, Franks doctrine, Prison and jail searches, Strip search | Comments Off on ID: Potential for destruction of evidence on cell phone was justification for its seizure

NPR & AP: ICE can’t make warrantless arrests in Oregon unless there’s risk of escape, judge rules

Posted on February 5, 2026 by Hall

NPR: ICE can’t make warrantless arrests in Oregon unless there’s risk of escape, judge rules via AP (“U.S. immigration agents in Oregon must stop arresting people without warrants unless there’s a likelihood of escape, a federal judge ruled Wednesday. U.S. District Judge Mustafa Kasubhai issued a preliminary injunction in a proposed class-action lawsuit targeting the Department of Homeland Security’s practice of arresting immigrants they happen to come across while conducting ramped-up enforcement operations — which critics have described as ‘arrest first, justify later.’ … Similar actions, including immigration agents entering private property without a warrant issued by a court, have drawn concern from civil rights groups across the country amid President Donald Trump’s mass deportation efforts. Courts in Colorado and Washington, D.C., have issued rulings like Kasubhai’s, and the government has appealed them.”)

Posted in Immigration arrests | Comments Off on NPR & AP: ICE can’t make warrantless arrests in Oregon unless there’s risk of escape, judge rules

CA10: Consent search of house for medical furlough from hospital after being brought there by police wasn’t coerced

Posted on February 5, 2026 by Hall

Defendant was detained for DUI, but he had medical issues and police wanted to release him to home under a “medical furlough.” He consented to an inspection of his house and weapons were found. He was never in custody, and there were no conditions on the inspection. United States v. Shobert, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 3350 (10th Cir. Feb. 3, 2026).*

This involved a valid investigatory stop and thus the officers were shielded from liability under Louisiana law. Huddleston v. Constantine, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21588 (W.D. La. Feb. 2, 2026).*

Qualified immunity for NYPD officers fails because the bodycam videos are ambiguous and don’t fully support their position. Novak v. City of N.Y., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21521 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 2, 2026).*

Taking this inmate’s personal phone book in a prison cell search doesn’t state a claim. Payne v. White, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21418 (S.D. Ill. Feb. 2, 2026).*

Posted in Consent, Prison and jail searches, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA10: Consent search of house for medical furlough from hospital after being brought there by police wasn’t coerced

TX1: Motion to suppress after officer testified at trial not timely

Posted on February 4, 2026 by Hall

Defense counsel’s motion to suppress coming during trial at the end of the officer’s testimony wasn’t timely. Brown v. State, 2026 Tex. App. LEXIS 1014 (Tex. App. – Houston (1st Dist.) Feb. 3, 2026)* (unpublished).

An automobile exception search can occur at the time of the stop or later. United States v. Douglas, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20987 (D. Vt. Feb. 2, 2026).*

Officers did a protective sweep of an apartment after it was shot up, and a M4 magazine was lawfully seen. State v. Hamilton, 2026 Wash. App. LEXIS 177 (Feb. 2, 2026)* (unpublished).

Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in a water bottle from which DNA was taken left in an interrogation room. United States v. Williams, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20791 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 1, 2026).*

Posted in Abandonment, Automobile exception, DNA, Protective sweep, Waiver | Comments Off on TX1: Motion to suppress after officer testified at trial not timely

GA: Curtilage for 4A purposes isn’t the same for defense of the home from an intruder

Posted on February 4, 2026 by Hall

Curtilage for Fourth Amendment purposes isn’t the same for defense of the home from an intruder. Graham v. State, 2026 Ga. LEXIS 25 (Feb. 3, 2026):

Continue reading →
Posted in Curtilage | Comments Off on GA: Curtilage for 4A purposes isn’t the same for defense of the home from an intruder

WaPo: Homeland Security is targeting Americans with this secretive legal weapon

Posted on February 3, 2026 by Hall

WaPo: Homeland Security is targeting Americans with this secretive legal weapon by John Woodrow Cox (“In October, a retiree emailed a DHS attorney to urge mercy for an asylum seeker. Then DHS subpoenaed his Google account and sent investigators to his home.”) Five hours after he sent the email came the subpoena.

Posted in Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters | Comments Off on WaPo: Homeland Security is targeting Americans with this secretive legal weapon

D.Ariz.: No standing to raise fruit of poisonous tree argument because “it’s not his tree”

Posted on February 3, 2026 by Hall

No standing to challenge the stop of a car he wasn’t in or wasn’t his. United States v. Flores-Mendivil, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20776 (D. Ariz. Feb. 2, 2026)*:

Continue reading →
Posted in Standing | Comments Off on D.Ariz.: No standing to raise fruit of poisonous tree argument because “it’s not his tree”

N.D.Iowa: Nexus shown to cell phone in harassing letters case

Posted on February 3, 2026 by Hall

The ubiquity of cell phones makes them likely sources of evidence in crimes. Here, there was [at least a slim] nexus to the cell phone and iPad being involved in sending harassing letters. United States v. Goodman, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20628 (N.D. Iowa Feb. 2, 2026)*:

Continue reading →
Posted in Cell phones, Nexus | Comments Off on N.D.Iowa: Nexus shown to cell phone in harassing letters case