CNS: SCOTUS won’t review role of race in police stops

Posted on June 23, 2026 by Hall

CNS: SCOTUS won’t review role of race in police stops by Kelsey Reichmann (“The Trump administration asked the justices to prohibit courts from considering race as a relevant factor under the Fourth Amendment’s ‘free to leave’ test.”)

Posted in Pretext | Comments Off on CNS: SCOTUS won’t review role of race in police stops

CO: Facebook SW lacked PC

Posted on June 22, 2026 by Hall

Social media search warrant for defendant’s Facebook account was invalid because there was no indication that he communicated with his sex assault victims through it. People v. Van Eck, 2026 Colo. App. LEXIS 1043 (June 11, 2026) (unpublished):

Continue reading →
Posted in Probable cause, Social media warrants | Comments Off on CO: Facebook SW lacked PC

D.Ariz.: Looking over ptf’s fence violated no REP

Posted on June 22, 2026 by Hall

Looking over a fence into plaintiff’s yard violated no reasonable expectation of privacy. Henry v. Pinal Cty. Cmty. Coll. Dist., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97301 (D. Ariz. May 4, 2026).

Defendant was arrested on an outstanding murder warrant, and the vehicle he was in was subject to a search incident. He claimed that the warrant could have been executed before he got in the car, but the Fourth Amendment doesn’t require that. United States v. Turner, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136080 (E.D. Mo. May 8, 2026).*

Defendant’s stop was based in part on an anonymous tip through a drug hotline, but the officer had more: high crime area, time of day, unusual activity, suspiciously hanging out. State v. Jackson, 2026-Ohio-2302, 2026 Ohio App. LEXIS 2281 (7th Dist. June 10, 2026).*

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Reasonable suspicion, Search incident | Comments Off on D.Ariz.: Looking over ptf’s fence violated no REP

D.D.C.: SW of house for clothing used in crime didn’t violate 4A

Posted on June 22, 2026 by Hall

There was probable cause for search of defendant’s house for clothing that was worn in the crime. What happens outside the house can create an inference that what’s sought is inside. (The good faith exception would also apply.) United States v. Joyner, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136993 (D.D.C. June 19, 2026).

Defendant had no standing or reasonable expectation of privacy in cell phone records of another person. United States v. Tabbs, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137165 (E.D. Pa. June 22, 2026).*

Defendants were suspected of transporting drugs from Los Angeles to Nashville by airplane. When the plane arrived in Nashville, a drug dog alerted on their checked luggage. The bags were sent to the luggage carousel. When they retrieved their bags, the officers stopped them to talk, and they both consented to opening the suitcases. United States v. McCain, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136086 (E.D. Mo. May 8, 2026).*

Posted in Airport searches, Consent, Nexus, Probable cause, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Standing | Comments Off on D.D.C.: SW of house for clothing used in crime didn’t violate 4A

OH1: SW for residence justified seizure of text messages about drug transactions received during execution of warrant

Posted on June 22, 2026 by Hall

The warrant for defendant’s residence was based on an affidavit that provided a minimally sufficient nexus between the offenses under investigation and the need to search the home, and the officers acted in good-faith reliance on the warrant. Also, two text messages referencing a drug transaction sent to defendant during the execution of the search warrant was admissible because they directly proved that defendant had the intent and knowledge to sell the drugs he possessed on that day, a necessary element to establish the charged offenses. State v. Madaris, 2026-Ohio-2305, 2026 Ohio App. LEXIS 2280 (1st Dist. June 18, 2026).

“Johnson further contends that the search warrant and arrest warrant were issued without probable cause and that the supporting affidavits omitted material information and were therefore constitutionally defective. … These claims are barred from federal habeas review.” Stone v. Powell. Johnson v. Dir., Tex. Dep’t of Crim. Just.-Corr. Insts. Div., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136365 (N.D. Tex. May 9, 2026).*

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Cell phones, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on OH1: SW for residence justified seizure of text messages about drug transactions received during execution of warrant

Cal.2: CA OSHA had the authority to subpoena records over a workplace death, but this one was overbroad

Posted on June 21, 2026 by Hall

An Uber delivery driver died on the job, and California OSHA sought records. Uber refused. OSHA subpoenaed them. OSHA has the power to subpoena records related to the death because it’s within its remit, but this one is overbroad and needs to be narrowed. Remanded. Div. of Occupational Safety & Health v. Uber Techs., Inc., 2026 Cal. App. LEXIS 375 (2d Dist. June 18, 2026).*

“The totality of the circumstances outlined in Inspector Coyt’s affidavit provided the magistrate judge sufficient basis to find probable cause. Inspector Coyt presented mutually reinforcing pieces of information: drug-package profile factors, including shipment from a known source state, return address irregularities, person-to-person addressing, and payment by cryptocurrency; a known informant tip—Inspector Coyt knew the source’s identity, spoke with the source, and confirmed the source’s report that packages were being shipped to Wilson from Florida through USPS records; a prior search of the same address that yielded methamphetamine; and since that prior search, a history of 40 packages shipped to Wilson over two years from a source state, 16 with postage paid in cryptocurrency.” United States v. Wilson, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136112 (W.D. Ky. June 18, 2026).* [Clearly probable cause. Not even close.]

Posted in Administrative search, Probable cause, Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters | Comments Off on Cal.2: CA OSHA had the authority to subpoena records over a workplace death, but this one was overbroad

CA6: ChatGPT’s opinion that evidence was “newly discovered” for a successor habeas is wrong

Posted on June 20, 2026 by Hall

Defendant was the subject of an NIT (Playpen) search warrant years ago and was convicted. In a successor habeas he argues that “ChatGPT’s ‘opinion’ that the magistrate judge participated in a crime by issuing the NIT warrant does not make Jones’s proposed claim newly discovered.” It’s not. He always knew about the Playpen warrant. In re Jones, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 17669 (6th Cir. June 17, 2026).

Probable cause was shown for this warrant for information on defendant’s cash app and social media accounts in a drug case. There is probable cause on the totality. “Her complaints focus on what is not contained in the Affidavits rather than considering how the information demonstrates the supportive role Bogan is alleged to have played in the conspiracy. It is not necessary for a participant in a drug trafficking conspiracy to be directly involved in acquiring or delivering the controlled substances.” United States v. Bogan, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136564 (E.D. Mo. May 8, 2026).*

Posted in Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Social media warrants | Comments Off on CA6: ChatGPT’s opinion that evidence was “newly discovered” for a successor habeas is wrong

N.D.Cal.: Tribe’s suit over overbroad SW can proceed

Posted on June 20, 2026 by Hall

The Tribe stated a Fourth Amendment claim against the county officials for executing an allegedly overbroad search warrant aimed at the Tribe’s cannabis operations on the reservation. The county alleged also that earthmoving work on the reservation was detrimental to the county. Round Valley Indian Tribes v. Kendall, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134356 (N.D. Cal. June 16, 2026)*:

Continue reading →
Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Overbreadth | Comments Off on N.D.Cal.: Tribe’s suit over overbroad SW can proceed

DE: Warrantless entry in DUI case unreasonable

Posted on June 20, 2026 by Hall

Warrantless entry to detain a DUI suspect was unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Claiming exigency isn’t enough. State v. Beasley, 2026 Del. C.P. LEXIS 8 (Del. C.P. June 16, 2026).

This defendant has no reasonable expectation of privacy in someone else’s apartment that was a stash house. United States v. Davis, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134288 (D. Neb. June 1, 2026).*

There were factual disputes for trial in the excessive force case, so appeal dismissed. Jones v. Kulesa, No. 25-1216 (8th Cir. June 18, 2026).*

Excessive window tint justified this stop. United States v. Williams, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133890 (E.D. Tenn. June 16, 2026).*

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Excessive force, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on DE: Warrantless entry in DUI case unreasonable

E.D.Ark.: Ptf stated claim for SW entry without proper announcement

Posted on June 19, 2026 by Hall

The search target’s shooting death case can proceed on an excessive force claim and failure to properly announce entry in an ATF raid. Malinowski v. United States, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134589 (E.D. Ark. June 17, 2026).

“Harris fails to meet his burden showing his Fourth Amendment rights were violated and that he had a reasonable expectation of privacy to the vehicle that was stopped and searched. Indeed, in his motion to suppress, he acknowledges he was not present at the scene of the car search, that the van did not belong to him, and that he did not personally own the van that was stopped and searched.” United States v. Harris, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93046 (D. Nev. Apr. 27, 2026)*

Staying in a hotel room gives standing to challenge the room safe. The cotenant has actual authority to consent to the search. (It is unnecessary to consider the probation search exception.) United States v. Graham, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132766 (W.D. Va. June 15, 2026).*

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Apparent authority, Consent, Knock and announce, Standing | Comments Off on E.D.Ark.: Ptf stated claim for SW entry without proper announcement

E.D.Ky.: Being a lookout vehicle at a crime is RS

Posted on June 18, 2026 by Hall

As to the stop of the vehicle: “The objective and articulable facts set forth above supported the officers’ belief that the Buick was either the lookout vehicle or the vehicle transporting the narcotics and gave rise to reasonable suspicion to conduct a traffic stop. As such, no Fourth Amendment violation occurred when the officers conducted a traffic stop of the Buick.” “Birkla primarily seeks suppression of any evidence of his presence at the scene of the traffic stop. This poses an interesting question. Are identity and presence suppressible fruits? As explained below, the answer is ‘no,’ and because Birkla’s Fourth Amendment rights were not otherwise infringed, the Court will DENY Defendant Birkla’s Motion.” United States v. Birkla, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132299 (E.D. Ky. June 15, 2026).*

“[T]he search warrants for his location data and Facebook records were supported by probable cause. … [H]e has not made an initial showing that the affidavits for the search warrants contained reckless and material omissions, so he is not entitled to a Franks hearing.” Motion to suppress denied. United States v. Leiva-Leiva, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132900 (E.D. Cal. June 15, 2026).*

Posted in Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Social media warrants | Comments Off on E.D.Ky.: Being a lookout vehicle at a crime is RS

E.D.Mich.: Missing 14 yo cell phone pinging at def’s house was exigency for entry to find her

Posted on June 18, 2026 by Hall

There was exigency for entry into defendant’s home when a missing autistic 14 year old’s cell phone was pinging at defendant’s address and there was no answer to the phone. Officers don’t have to wait for the exigency to get worse before acting. United States v. Smith, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132833 (E.D. Mich. June 15, 2026):

Continue reading →
Posted in Emergency / exigency | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Missing 14 yo cell phone pinging at def’s house was exigency for entry to find her

CA3: Smell of MJ but none found can still be PC

Posted on June 18, 2026 by Hall

The smell of marijuana is probable cause even if none is found in the subsequent search. The absence of marijuana only mitigates the probable cause, not eliminate it. United States v. Loveings, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 17330 (3d Cir. June 16, 2026).

This warrant was particular. It specified a cell phone was to be seized. State v. Bourque, 2026 La. App. LEXIS 1188 (La. App. 1 Cir June 15, 2026).*

The government’s late filed certification for an interlocutory appeal of a suppression order was objected to by the defense. The motion to dismiss is denied, and the case will proceed to the merits. United States v. Robinson, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 17334 (2d Cir. June 16, 2026).*

Posted in Particularity, Plain view, feel, smell, Probable cause | Comments Off on CA3: Smell of MJ but none found can still be PC

Cal.4: SW not needed to test DNA abandoned in a rape

Posted on June 17, 2026 by Hall

Defendant’s DNA left at the scene of two rapes was abandoned, and the state didn’t need a warrant to search it. People v. Konther, 2026 Cal. App. LEXIS 369 (4th Dist. June 12, 2026).

In a drug case bench trial, the judge is presumed not to imply guilt from the existence of a search warrant. State v. Stallworth, 2026-Ohio-2242, 2026 Ohio App. LEXIS 2214 (3d Dist. June 15, 2026).*

Officers had probable cause to believe defendant was in his girlfriend’s high-rise apartment when they came with an arrest warrant. They didn’t find him, but a sweep revealed a gun under a mattress. That led to a search warrant. “The Court rules that the officers had a reasonable basis to believe that Mr. Burch was inside the apartment, and that their discovery of the pistol under the bed was the product of a reasonable search for Mr. Burch and therefore did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Additionally, despite its many errors, made with reckless disregard for the truth, the Court finds that the affidavit used to obtain the search warrant still supports a finding of probable cause. Accordingly, the Court denies the motion in full.” United States v. Burch, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132653 (N.D. Ill. June 15, 2026).*

Posted in Abandonment, Admissibility of evidence, DNA, Franks doctrine, Protective sweep | Comments Off on Cal.4: SW not needed to test DNA abandoned in a rape

D.D.C.: Open container arrest justified search incident of backpack in passenger compartment

Posted on June 17, 2026 by Hall

Defendant was stopped for a traffic offense, and he had an open container in violation of D.C. law. That justified a search incident of the area around him, including a backpack. United States v. Smith, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131891 (D.D.C. June 12, 2026).

Probable cause to arrest for any offense defeats a malicious prosecution claim. Atsas v. Bowen, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 17161 (6th Cir. June 11, 2026).*

“Here, the Fifth Circuit case of United States v. Hernandez controls the outcome: the tip in this case had the requisite indicia of reliability, and the totality of the circumstances in which the tip was relayed to Agent D.B. provide the degree of suspicion needed for the stop. An individualized assessment of the Brignoni-Ponce factors also leads the Court to the same conclusion. Thus, the Court finds that the stop was supported by reasonable suspicion and, thus, there is no constitutional violation meriting the suppression of evidence that Wanzo seeks.” United States v. Wanzo, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132042 (W.D. Tex. June 12, 2026).*

Posted in Immigration arrests, Immigration checkpoints, Probable cause, Search incident | Comments Off on D.D.C.: Open container arrest justified search incident of backpack in passenger compartment

404 Media: Cops Keep Getting Arrested for Using Flock to Stalk People

Posted on June 16, 2026 by Hall

404 Media: Cops Keep Getting Arrested for Using Flock to Stalk People by Jason KoEbler (“There have been more than a dozen cases around the country where police use Flock to obsessively and illegally stalk people.”)

Posted in Automatic license plate readers | Comments Off on 404 Media: Cops Keep Getting Arrested for Using Flock to Stalk People

Cal.1: Entry by robot, drone, tear gas, and flash bang was with PC after def refused to come out on a SW and AW

Posted on June 15, 2026 by Hall

To arrest the defendant on a warrant and with a search warrant, the SWAT team surrounded his house. They used a robot, drone, tear gas, and a flash bang sent into the apartment. He finally came out and surrendered. Despite alleged false statements in the paperwork, the arrest was reasonable. “We will affirm the judgment because we agree with the Attorney General that the trial court incorrectly traversed the arrest warrant because the warrant affidavit still set forth sufficient facts to establish probable cause even after the false statements were excised. Therefore the police lawfully could arrest defendant in his home or by forcing him from it, as they did.” People v. Hayes, 2026 Cal. App. LEXIS 368 (1st Dist. June 12, 2026).

Defendant’s vehicle was lawfully stopped, and it was extended by reasonable suspicion. When the dog alerted, the car was towed for a later search. The dog alert was probable cause for the warrant. United States v. Christian, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131095 (W.D. Pa. June 12, 2026).*

Defendant was approached by police and they talked. He wasn’t seized until he was tripped trying to get away. United States v. Wilson, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131275 (D.N.J. June 12, 2026).*

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Probable cause, Seizure, Warrant execution | Comments Off on Cal.1: Entry by robot, drone, tear gas, and flash bang was with PC after def refused to come out on a SW and AW

CA8: Def’s connection to property searched was so tenuous he had no standing; no one claimed to know him

Posted on June 15, 2026 by Hall

“Where the only witness testifying that defendant was an overnight guest (1) initially denied knowing defendant on the day of arrest, (2) had a prior conviction for filing a false police report, (3) could not provide basic information about defendant despite claiming longtime friendship and gang affiliation, and (4) no other household residents knew defendant despite his purported multiple stays, the district court did not clearly err in finding defendant was not an overnight guest and thus lacked Fourth Amendment standing to challenge the bedroom search. Motion to suppress properly denied.” (Lexis summary) United States v. Gatkuoth, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 16408 (8th Cir. June 8, 2026).

The officer coming to defendant’s home was told there was an arrest warrant for her. The warrant wasn’t put into evidence, but it’s not otherwise disputed. The entry on the arrest warrant was valid. Defendant tried to flee in the house. People v. Warren, 2026 Mich. App. LEXIS 4962 (June 12, 2026).*

Even if the Fourth Amendment was violated apprehending an undocumented person, habeas corpus is not available. Velasquez v. Warden S. La. ICE Processing Ctr., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131828 (W.D. La. May 7, 2026).*

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Immigration arrests, Standing | Comments Off on CA8: Def’s connection to property searched was so tenuous he had no standing; no one claimed to know him

D.Mass.: Inventory valid despite there being no impoundment policy

Posted on June 15, 2026 by Hall

Despite the local police having no formal impoundment policy, defendant’s vehicle was impounded with their permission and inventoried by the FBI. The impoundment was still reasonable. United States v. Richards, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126028 (D. Mass. June 8, 2026).

Maryland has well developed case law on “sexually invasive searches,” which was at issue here. In a long, comprehensive, and unpublished opinion, “On balance, we conclude that, although intrusive and demeaning like any sexually invasive search, the reach-in search at issue was reasonable and did not violate Smith’s rights under the Fourth Amendment.” Smith v. State, 2026 Md. App. LEXIS 674 (June 10, 2026) (unpublished).*

Maryland passed comprehensive firearm carry legislation after Bruen. It permitted the carrying of a firearm with a permit, but not open carry. An officer watching surveillance video saw defendant display his gun. Other officers were dispatched, and they frisked him. There was reasonable suspicion for the stop because he displayed the gun. He was a felon in possession. United States v. Fallin, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129960 (D. Md. June 11, 2026).*

Posted in Body searches, Inventory, Reasonable suspicion, Strip search | Comments Off on D.Mass.: Inventory valid despite there being no impoundment policy

CA6: The smell of burnt MJ in a car is still PC for driving under influence even where personal possession is legal.

Posted on June 14, 2026 by Hall

“Possession of recreational marijuana may be legal in Missouri, but ‘[o]perating or being in physical control of any motor vehicle … while under the influence of marijuana’ is not. Mo. Const. art. XIV § 2(3)(1)(d). Considering the strong odor of marijuana Officer Perkins smelled coming from Drake’s vehicle, as well as his evasive and erratic behavior during the stop, we conclude Officer Perkins could have reasonably believed he would discover evidence that Drake had operated a motor vehicle while under the influence of marijuana by searching his car. Consequently, Perkins had probable cause to search Drake’s vehicle under the automobile exception.” United States v. Drake, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 16415 (8th Cir. June 8, 2026).

Defendant was surveilled because of an outstanding Idaho warrant, then an in-state warrant. The state’s higher privacy rights were not violated. Reasonable suspicion developed for his detention. Ultimately, he consented to a search by agreeing officers could look at his stuff. People v. Reyes, 2026 Mich. App. LEXIS 4961 (June 12, 2026).*

Posted in Consent, Plain view, feel, smell, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA6: The smell of burnt MJ in a car is still PC for driving under influence even where personal possession is legal.