S.D.N.Y.: Project Veritas SW unsealed with limited redactions

One of the Project Veritas search warrant affidavits is partially redacted for privacy of some people and ordered filed. Redactions must be limited. In re Search Warrant Dated Nov. 5, 2021, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179075 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 11, 2026):

Continue reading
Posted in Warrant papers | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: Project Veritas SW unsealed with limited redactions

D.Ariz.: SW for firearm didn’t go stale

This search warrant for a firearm wasn’t stale because firearms are kept. In any event, the good faith exception applies. United States v. Cherry, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178900 (D. Ariz. Aug. 11, 2026).*

Defendant’s failure to file a post-trial motion on his denied suppression motion in a stipulated bench trial was waiver for appeal. People v. Haskins, 2026 IL App (4th) 250903 (Aug. 4, 2026).*

Defendant ran from his car and thus abandoned it sitting on a sidewalk in front of a dilapidated building. Alternatively, officers were concerned someone else could be in the vehicle and they couldn’t see in because of the dark tint. United States v. Wiley, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 23873 (7th Cir. Aug. 6, 2026).*

Defendant’s claim on appeal that his DNA was improperly seized was waived by lack of a record to evaluate it. State v. Woods, 2026 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 508 (Aug. 7, 2026).*

Posted in Abandonment, Burden of pleading, Staleness, Waiver | Comments Off on D.Ariz.: SW for firearm didn’t go stale

VA: Reverse keyword search warrant to Google decided on GFE but not merits

Reverse keyword search warrant to Google connected defendant to this crime. It’s not like geofence warrants in Chatrie, but the merits aren’t decided because the good faith exception applies in any event. Clements v. Commonwealth, 2026 Va. App. LEXIS 428 (Aug. 11, 2026). (You never have to decide the merits as long as you can go back to the good faith exception.)

Continue reading
Posted in Computer and cloud searches | Comments Off on VA: Reverse keyword search warrant to Google decided on GFE but not merits

N.D.Ohio: Two dog sniffs didn’t provide PC for vehicle search

The first dog sniff didn’t provide probable cause, but it did provide reasonable suspicion to continue the stop longer. Then a second sniff didn’t either. Motion to suppress granted. United States v. Copeland, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178749 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 11, 2026).*

“Moreover, his claim … that his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise a Fourth Amendment issue on direct appeal are raised for the first time in his COA motion and, accordingly, this court lacks jurisdiction to consider them.” United States v. Najera, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 23934 (5th Cir. Aug. 5, 2026).*

Warrantless seizure of defendant’s cell phone was reasonable during a drug investigation where the cell phone was linked to the crime because the co-conspirators were talking on the phone regularly during the conspiracy. United States v. Veilleux, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176947 (D. Mont. Aug. 7, 2026).*

Posted in Cell phones, Dog sniff | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: Two dog sniffs didn’t provide PC for vehicle search

GA reaffirms a constitutional right of privacy in medical records

Georgia reaffirms there is a constitutional right of privacy in medical records. Here it was a civil discovery dispute. Goodell v. Moulton, 2026 Ga. LEXIS 232 (Aug. 11, 2026):

Continue reading
Posted in Privileges, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on GA reaffirms a constitutional right of privacy in medical records

N.D.Ohio: Dog sniff during initial records check did not extend the stop

The stop was not extended by the drug dog that arrived almost immediately and the sniff was done while the records check was going on. Alternatively, there was reasonable suspicion for it. United States v. Billips, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176422 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 7, 2026).

The GPS tracking warrant and search warrants were based on probable cause. United States v. Vega, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177407 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 3, 2026).*

During execution of a CSAM search warrant, officers detained defendant while they were holding rifles, and a reasonable person wouldn’t think he was free to leave. [Screenshot in opinion.] He was thus in custody when questioned and his statements are suppressed. The search warrant, however, is valid. United States v. Germano, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177330 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2026).*

There is a question of fact for trial on whether the defendant officer unreasonably used deadly force on plaintiff, and the qualified immunity appeal is dismissed. Tippitt v. Iversen, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 23944 (5th Cir. Aug. 5, 2026).*

Posted in Custody, Dog sniff, Excessive force, GPS / Tracking Data, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: Dog sniff during initial records check did not extend the stop

E.D.Mo.: Seizure of def’s Apple watch was valid as a search incident because it could be used to erase iPhone

Seizure of defendant’s Apple watch was valid incident to arrest because officers feared he could erase his iPhone with it. The traffic stop might have been pretextual, but it doesn’t matter because defendant had an arrest warrant on a federal indictment pending. As to a Franks challenge, defendant fails in his offer of proof. United States v. Avery, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177942 (E.D. Mo. July 2, 2026).

Defendant was stopped for driving his rental car too long in the passing lane. The car smelled of burnt marijuana. On the totality, including defendant’s priors for drugs, the officer had reasonable suspicion to continue the stop because he suspected defendant was carrying drugs between Harrisburg and Lancaster. Commonwealth v. Gould, 2026 Pa. Super. LEXIS 420 (Aug. 10, 2026).*

Defendant’s stop for a traffic offense was reasonable because there was a factual basis, no matter the officer’s motivation. Then reasonable suspicion developed. United States v. Billips, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176422 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 7, 2026).*

Posted in Pretext, Reasonable suspicion, Search incident | Comments Off on E.D.Mo.: Seizure of def’s Apple watch was valid as a search incident because it could be used to erase iPhone

Truthout: First Came the Flock Cameras. Now Local Cops Want Autonomous Drones.

Truthout: First Came the Flock Cameras. Now Local Cops Want Autonomous Drones. by Michael Ludwig (“Hundreds of local police departments have received waivers to fly surveillance drones that navigate with AI.”):

Continue reading
Posted in Drones | Comments Off on Truthout: First Came the Flock Cameras. Now Local Cops Want Autonomous Drones.

NYT: The Surveillance Network Tracking Cars Across the U.S.

NYT: The Surveillance Network Tracking Cars Across the U.S. (there are now 120,000 cameras).

Posted in Automatic license plate readers | Comments Off on NYT: The Surveillance Network Tracking Cars Across the U.S.

D.N.M.: 2¼ hour detention was still with RS despite 10th Cir.’s 90-minute limit

“Defendant was detained from approximately 4:45 a.m. until his release at around 7:00 a.m., a total duration of two hours and 15 minutes. … Having concluded that the initial detention was lawful, the Court must next address whether the detention was reasonable in length and scope. While facts support both sides of the argument, the two-hour timeline presents a close, borderline case because it exceeds the Tenth Circuit’s 90-minute reference point for investigative detentions and approaches a de facto arrest requiring probable cause. On balance, however, the Court leans toward the position that the detention remained constitutionally permissible.” United States v. Morales-Aguirre, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175394 (D.N.M. Aug. 6, 2026).

There was probable cause and exigency for seizure of defendant’s cell phone during a traffic stop in a drug investigation. The search warrant for the phone detailed the probable cause for its search. United States v. Veilleux, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176947 (D. Mont. Aug. 7, 2026).*

2255 petitioner’s Rule 60 motion that the court failed to consider his ineffective assistance of counsel on a Fourth Amendment claim is just wrong. It did. Benjamin v. United States, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176803 (E.D. Tenn. Aug. 7, 2026).*

Posted in Cell phones, Ineffective assistance, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.N.M.: 2¼ hour detention was still with RS despite 10th Cir.’s 90-minute limit

W.D.Pa.: ALPR hit on stolen vehicle was RS for stop

A U-Haul van was reported stolen by them, and the LPN was entered into the ALPR database. It showed up near Pittsburgh, and that was reasonable suspicion to pull it over. United States v. Lewis, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177108 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 7, 2026).

Defendant was detained in his own home during a search, and he would not consider himself free to leave for custody purposes. United States v. Cruz, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176020 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 6, 2026).*

Raising a Fourth Amendment claim for the first time in the request for the certificate of appealability of a 2255 is waiver. United States v. Najera, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 23934 (5th Cir. Aug. 5, 2026).*

Defendant was involved in three controlled buys and that was probable cause for his arrest without a warrant, and his search incident was valid. State v. Daniels, 2026-Ohio-3050 (6th Dist. Aug. 7, 2026).*

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Automatic license plate readers, Custody, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: ALPR hit on stolen vehicle was RS for stop

S.D.Miss.: Cell tower dump violated 4A as a de facto geofence warrant

U.S. District Judge affirms U.S.M.J.’s decision that cell tower dumps violated the Fourth Amendment. The request was essentially a geofence warrant without a showing of need. In re Four Applications for Search Warrants Seeking Info. Associated with Particular Cellular Towers, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176165 (S.D. Miss. Aug. 5, 2026):

Continue reading
Posted in Cell phones, geofence | Comments Off on S.D.Miss.: Cell tower dump violated 4A as a de facto geofence warrant

NC: Def’s bloody shirt seized as evidence from ER didn’t need a SW to test for DNA

Defendant was a suspect in a shooting incident. At the ER, his bloody shirt was collected as evidence. A separate search warrant wasn’t required to test the DNA on it. State v. Howze, 2026 N.C. App. LEXIS 652 (Aug. 5, 2026).

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not objecting during voir dire to mention of informant recorded statements of the accused because there was no basis to exclude them. United States v. Hossain, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175221 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 6, 2026).*

Whether the first search warrant was valid is a moot point because nothing from it is being used in the case. [It was suspect, but moot.] The second search of defendant’s store for counterfeit goods was by consent. United States v. Vasquez-Yax, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175645 (W.D.N.C. June 17, 2026),* adopted, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174947 (W.D. N.C. Aug. 6, 2026).*

Posted in Consent, DNA, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on NC: Def’s bloody shirt seized as evidence from ER didn’t need a SW to test for DNA

CA6: SW in drug case led to finding CSAM, SW was still particular

Defendant was a suspect in a drug investigation, and they got search warrants for his place and cell phones, not knowing even how many there were or what they looked like. The warrants were with probable cause. The search for drug trafficking information led to discovery of CSAM. The warrant was still particular because suspects could use false file names to hide things. United States v. Metzger, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 23553 (6th Cir. Aug. 4, 2026).

There was probable cause for defendant’s arrest for being involved in a fight (“scrum”) outside a DC nightclub. The officer’s testimony differed somewhat from the bodycam, but that’s not determinative because it was a mess and confusing. Even the bodycam wasn’t conclusive. United States v. Ray, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174743 (D.D.C. July 31, 2026).*

The government’s 270-day delay in seeking a search warrant to search defendant’s packages wasn’t unreasonable enough to require suppression. He admittedly had a reduced privacy interest in them. United States v. Bennett, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 23661 (9th Cir. Aug. 6, 2026).*

Posted in Particularity, Probable cause, Scope of search, Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA6: SW in drug case led to finding CSAM, SW was still particular

S.D.Tex.: Compelling def to give up combination to safe during search violated 5A

Compelling defendant to give up the combination of a safe in his shared dwelling to search it under a warrant violated the Fifth Amendment. United States v. Villarreal-Resendiz, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174690 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 5, 2026):

Continue reading
Posted in Privileges | Comments Off on S.D.Tex.: Compelling def to give up combination to safe during search violated 5A

CA5: Ptf’s forced drug test wasn’t justified by exigent circumstances

Plaintiff’s claim of being forced to do a drug test but not for protection of the children she cared for stated a claim and survived summary judgment. Knighton v. Benton Cty., 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 23741 (5th Cir. Aug. 6, 2026)*:

Continue reading
Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Emergency / exigency, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA5: Ptf’s forced drug test wasn’t justified by exigent circumstances

IN: Officers leaving car door open to facilitate drug dog entry into car violated 4A

During a traffic stop, officers left defendant’s car door open apparently so the drug dog would go in, and it did. This entry violated the Fourth Amendment. Boyd v. State, 2026 Ind. App. LEXIS 263 (Aug. 5, 2026).

The inventory of defendant’s rented vehicle was within policy and valid. State v. Haywood, 2026 Ohio App. LEXIS 2905 (1st Dist. Aug. 5, 2026).*

Defendant was walking and seen likely with a gun on him, and officers approached. He fled, jumping a fence, but he was finally captured in a backyard. Officers found the hidden gun and one round in his pocket. He was not seized when he abandoned the gun. Hatcherson-Ross v. United States, 2026 D.C. App. LEXIS 265 (Aug. 6, 2026).*

Posted in Abandonment, Dog sniff, Inventory, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on IN: Officers leaving car door open to facilitate drug dog entry into car violated 4A

S.D.Tex.: A safe could be searched under a child porn SW

On a child pornography search warrant, search of a locked safe was reasonable. United States v. Villarreal-Resendiz, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174690 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 5, 2026).

Stopping over the stop line was reasonable suspicion for this stop. United States v. Montes, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174112 (N.D. Tex. Aug. 5, 2026).*

There’s no showing that the officers unreasonably exceeded the scope of the warrant, so suppression isn’t warranted even if they slightly did. United States v. Maxie, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174526 (S.D. Ala. Aug. 5, 2026).*

Defendant wasn’t seized when he wasn’t submitting to arrest. United States v. Corbett-Burns, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174628 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 5, 2026).*

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Reasonable suspicion, Scope of search, Seizure | Comments Off on S.D.Tex.: A safe could be searched under a child porn SW

CA7: Smoking marijuana in public is still an arrestable offense; def’s backpack could be searched incident to it

Smoking marijuana in public is still an arrestable offense, and defendant’s backpack could be searched incident to it. United States v. Worku, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 23239 (7th Cir. Aug. 4, 2026).*

Because the stop and frisk was reasonable, the probable cause question is moot. Commonwealth v. Correa, 2026 PA Super 176 (Aug. 5, 2026).*

“While a close call, the Court agrees with the government. On the totality of the circumstances, the facts attested to support a suspicion that the truck was unregistered. With around three years of patrol experience each at the time of the stop, Officers Irwin and Johnson had conducted countless vehicle stops. They explained from experience that ‘NO RECORD’ messages are associated with vehicles that are unregistered or, worse, stolen or car jacked. Officer Irwin in fact described that these so-called ‘NO RECORD’ vehicles turn out unregistered ‘[m]ost of the time.’ Although neither the truck nor its license plate exhibited damage or suspicious signatures, the officers testified that ‘NO RECORD’ messages often result in the vehicle being unregistered absent those imperfections. It is immaterial that the officers’ suspicion was proven false because they ‘produc[ed] facts establishing that [they] reasonably believed that a violation had taken place.’” United States v. Brown, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173908 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 5, 2026).*

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Search incident, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on CA7: Smoking marijuana in public is still an arrestable offense; def’s backpack could be searched incident to it

GA: Def in sex assault case has no standing to challenge alleged victim’s rape exam

“And here, it strains credulity for Young to claim that he has any standing to challenge the lawfulness of the victim’s sexual-assault examination.” Young v. State, 2026 Ga. App. LEXIS 401 (Aug. 5, 2026).*

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not challenging this federal search on state law grounds. United States v. Lewis, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172582 (W.D. La. Aug. 3, 2026).*

“Plaintiff asserts that Defendants violated his constitutional rights by not immediately releasing him from custody on electronic monitoring. Yet, ‘no court has held that the Fourth Amendment compels the release of sex offenders who lack lawful and approved living arrangements.’ Smith v. Anderson, 874 F.3d 966, 968 (7th Cir. 2017) (citing Brown v. Randle, 847 F.3d 861, 864 (7th Cir. 2017)). The Court cannot infer from the allegations contained in the complaint that Defendants violated Plaintiff’s constitutional rights by verifying information with the Wisconsin Department of Corrections before releasing him on electronic monitoring.” Rowell v. Mikula, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173009 (E.D. Wis. Aug. 4, 2026).*

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on GA: Def in sex assault case has no standing to challenge alleged victim’s rape exam