Defendant’s alleged excessive nervousness wasn’t visible on the video. And, even if he was, that’s a reasonable response to multiple police cars showing up for a routine traffic stop. No reasonable suspicion to continue the stop. People v. Thomas, 2026 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3967 (Columbia Co. Apr. 27, 2026).
The government [pretty obviously] showed probable cause for prospective cell phone location information of a California to New York drug conspiracy. United States v. Guadarrama, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93491 (S.D. Cal. Apr. 28, 2026).*
Defendant in his rented truck violated two traffic laws. While the officer was following he check the license plate reader information that showed the truck had made a quick round trip from Colorado to California. It turned out his girlfriend had rented the truck, but nothing on the rental agreement made him an authorized driver. A drug dog was run around the truck after calling in the information he had and before issuing any citations. The dog alerted, and the use of the ALPR didn’t cause the stop. United States v. Salcido-Gonzalez, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12341 (10th Cir. Apr. 29, 2026).*
Posted inAutomatic license plate readers, Cell phones|Comments Off on NY Columbia Co.: Alleged excessive nervousness when multiple police cars arrive at a traffic stop doesn’t add to RS
Defendant fled the police and tried dumping his backpack at his grandmother’s house. She opened the door, saw what was happening, and shut the door. Continuing to flee, he dumped the backpack on her curtilage. It was found abandoned. United States v. Lodge, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12547 (4th Cir. Apr. 30, 2026):
The warrant was all inclusive of drug information including use of the proceeds, and it didn’t violate particularity. Ball v. State, 2026 Ga. App. LEXIS 222 (Apr. 30, 2026):*
The District Court erred in applying search incident to defendant’s bag where there was a valid alternative ground of inevitable discovery through inventory when he would be processed into jail. United States v. Allen, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12443 (4th Cir. Apr. 28, 2026).*
Defendant’s motion papers show no factual dispute on the motion to suppress, so he doesn’t get a hearing. People v. Sampson, 2026 NYLJ LEXIS 730 (N.Y. Co. Apr. 9, 2026).*
Defendant’s pole camera argument is unpreserved. People v. Griffin, 2026 NY Slip Op 02670 (2d Dept. Apr. 29, 2026).*
Officers had reasonable suspicion for this probation search. United States v. Spadt, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94611 (D. Mont. Apr. 29, 2026).*
Defendant argues that the return must be the original copy of the warrant issued by the judge per statute. It was a copy. Even if it was a mistake, it was ministerial from which there was no prejudice. State v. Minneci, 349 Or. App. 108 (Apr. 29, 2026).
Plaintiff’s arrest for disorderly was with probable cause under Arkansas law. When he resisted, his take down was reasonable. Ward v. City of Sherwood, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12101 (8th Cir. Apr. 28, 2026).*
There was reasonable suspicion for the search of defendant’s car under a probation search waiver. State v. Spottswood, 2026 Wisc. App. LEXIS 470 (Apr. 28, 2026).*
A sealed ex parte motion not to be filed or served on government ended up on Lexis seeking information for a Franks challenge. United States v. Silva, No. 2:25-Cr-268 JAM, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93238 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 21, 2026).*
Defendant’s houseguest called the local suicide hotline, and a patrol officer came by the house, and the guest let him in. The officer smelled marijuana, but didn’t act on it right away because of the suicide call. The entry was based on exigent circumstances. State v. Swanson, 2026 Iowa App. LEXIS 400 (Apr. 29, 2026).
Plaintiff texted his mother-in-law to say that he and his wife committed suicide together. She called the police, and they came to the house and entered. They reentered to get medications for a potential overdose. The entries were valid. Thivener v. Nero, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12303 (3d Cir. Apr. 29, 2026).
In an employment action against a city, plaintiff sought discovery of messages on cell phones. Making the city seek them raises Fourth Amendment concerns under O’Connor v. Ortega. Reynolds v. City of Rochester, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93293 (W.D.N.Y. Apr. 28, 2026):
Reason: All New Cars Could Have Mandatory Surveillance Tech Unless Congress Stops This Mandate by Meagan O’Rourke (“This week, several House Republicans reignited a yearslong debate over a law that federally mandates cars to have impaired driving technology, raising concerns about the expanding surveillance state. The controversy over ‘kill switch’ technology began in 2021, when Congress passed the HALT Drunk Driving Act as part of the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law. The provision requires that ‘advanced drunk and impaired driving prevention technology’—which the bill defined as a system that can ‘passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired’ and ‘prevent or limit motor vehicle operation if an impairment is detected’—be installed in new cars. Such systems could involve driver eye tracking, a feature already built into some cars.”)
Posted inSurveillance technology|Comments Off on Reason: All New Cars Could Have Mandatory Surveillance Tech Unless Congress Stops This Mandate
Being tried and acquitted of murder, plaintiff sued the police who arrested her. She had an affirmative defense which led to the acquittal. Failure to present conclusive evidence of an affirmative defense to the issuing magistrate would be a probable cause violation. Here, however, there is no clearly established authority for that, and the officer gets qualified immunity. Kendig v. Stolar, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 12170 (3d Cir. Apr. 28, 2026):
Defendant’s motion to preclude the government from referring to being in his house on a search warrant is granted in part and denied in part under F.R.E. 403. The government cannot suggest that issuance of a warrant means any judicial officer believes defendant is guilty, and defendant can craft a limiting instruction for trial. United States v. Reyes, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92493 (D. Idaho Apr. 27, 2026):
Even if GPS monitoring by a Community Supervision Officer under D.C. law violated regulations, a reasonable mistake of law (Heien) overcomes the violation, and it is not suppressed. United States v. White, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92214 (D.D.C. Apr. 27, 2026).
The use of flashlights in a dark room isn’t a Fourth Amendment violation. United States v. McCary, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92257 (E.D. Okla. Mar. 10, 2026).*
22-month-old information in a child pornography was not stale. United States v. Hoffman, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92276 (M.D. Pa. Apr. 27, 2026).*
The government didn’t prove reasonable suspicion for defendant’s traffic stop. “Accordingly, even under the alternative assumption that the initial stop was valid, the Court holds that law enforcement violated the Fourth Amendment by converting the stop into a custodial arrest without probable cause, and that the fruits of that arrest must be suppressed.” United States v. Rizo, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92456 (S.D. Miss. Apr. 27, 2026).*
Inserting a key in a lock to see if it worked wasn’t a search. The key was in his jail property and lawfully taken from there. A warrant wasn’t required to get into his property bag. United States v. Miller, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91369 (E.D.N.C. Apr. 24, 2026).
Defendant’s stop was justified for a paper dealer tag, and that led to consent to search for firearms which led to probable cause to search for drugs. United States v. Jenkins, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63336 (M.D. Ala. Mar. 2, 2026),* adopted, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60469 (M.D. Ala. Mar. 23, 2026).*
Defendant claimed that the search warrant for pharmacy records in a pill mill case was based entirely on a prescription database, but it wasn’t. There were 64 pages of other stuff showing probable cause. CVS Pharmacy, Inc. v. Chaney, 2026 Ky. App. LEXIS 40 (Apr. 24, 2026).*
Texas’s statutory exclusionary rule (Art. 38.21) doesn’t apply in federal court. United States v. Etheredge, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91820 (W.D. Tex. Apr. 24, 2026).
Opening a box in defendant’s car was an unreasonable search, and it likely violated the Fourth Amendment. Defendant was later Mirandized and consented. After a thorough discussion of the caselaw, the court finds that the constitutional violation was slight [what about de minimis intrusions still being intrusions] and the court declines to suppress. United States v. Herrera, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91988 (D.N.M. Apr. 27, 2026)* [reasonable people could disagree]:
A boat tied to a dock is subject to the vehicle exception even if somebody lives on it. United States v. Jones, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 11866 (9th Cir. Apr. 24, 2026).
Officers don’t have to piecemeal the exigency for a warrantless entry. It’s the totality, which is present here. Eurton v. Thomas, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 11868 (6th Cir. Apr. 23, 2026).*
Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not filing a motion to suppress that was doomed to fail on all accounts: stop for illegal U-turn, fleeing from vehicle carrying a rifle that was discarded in flight. Lay v. United States, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90278 (W.D. Tenn. Apr. 24, 2026).*
Even plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment claim survives a Heck bar, which it might, it’s barred by limitations. He always knew about the search. Stauch v. Jackson, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91261 (S.D. Ala. Apr. 24, 2026).*
The plain view of firearms occurred under Buie’s first scenario, but not the second because it involved a search for a person and continued thereafter. Still, it’s sustained. United States v. McCary, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91328 (E.D. Okla. Apr. 24, 2026):
Posted inPlain view, feel, smell, Protective sweep|Comments Off on E.D.Okla.: Plain view of firearms under protective sweep sustained under Buie’s first prong
Defendant was arrested on a state Capias for FTA issued in open court. The search incident to the arrest was valid. United States v. Barnhart, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91284 (E.D. Va. Apr. 24, 2026).
Defendant’s conviction is affirmed. There was probable cause for the warrant, and the trial court was correct in not disclosing the CI’s name for safety reasons. People v. El, 2026 NY Slip Op 02415 (2d Dept. Apr. 22, 2026)* (convicted Sept. 4, 2019).
Defendant had a cell phone in prison which the FBI got and opened and then got a warrant for his iCloud and Instagram accounts to show his connection to gang activity. The warrants were issued with probable cause and weren’t overbroad. United States v. Barnes, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89499 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 10, 2026).*
Chatrie v. United States, 25-112 (cert. granted Jan. 16, 2026; argument April 27, 2026) (ScotusBlog). Question presented: Whether the execution of the geofence warrant violated the Fourth Amendment.
DEA agents following defendant in an unmarked car observed traffic violations, and they requested a marked unit to make a stop, which was valid. United States v. Peterson, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90905 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 24, 2026).*
A state prosecution was based on a video that was inconclusive, and it failed. There was at least arguable probable cause for the arrest, and that’s enough for qualified immunity. Puller v. Greco, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 11777 (10th Cir. Apr. 24, 2026).*
The search warrant materials were in existence in 2016, and they aren’t newly discovered evidence for his 2024 post-conviction petition. State v. Sanchez, 2026-Ohio-1497 (5th Dist. Apr. 24, 2026).*
The dashcam caught defendant wandering over the fog line before the stop, and the trial court credited that. State v. Jackson, 2026-Ohio-1486 (4th Dist. Apr. 16, 2026).*
“To the contrary, this testimony confirms only that Agent Evans’s forensic examination was circumscribed by the legal boundaries of the search warrant. Cox’s attempt to equate the examiner’s adherence to those boundaries with a failure to uncover exculpatory evidence is a logical non sequitur; the ex post argument—that the examiner’s failure to search for viruses or other files that would negate Cox’s intent constitutes forensic malpractice—is exactly the kind of ‘undeveloped assertion[]’ that the Eleventh Circuit has held insufficient to satisfy Moore. …” Cox v. Jones, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90829 (M.D. Ala. Apr. 24, 2026).*
Defendant’s stop was for an object hanging from the rearview mirror. When the officer got to the car, reasonable suspicion for marijuana use developed: a baggie on the floor and it looked like the driver had recently consumed. United States v. Hallmon, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 11674 (8th Cir. Apr. 24, 2026).*
Defendant passenger had no standing to contest the search of the glove compartment of the car he was riding in. United States v. Cubias, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90807 (N.D. Okla. Apr. 23, 2026).*
This Facebook warrant for information about gang activity was based on probable cause and was particular enough, considering the context of what the government was looking for. In any event, it wasn’t so bad that the good faith exception didn’t apply. United States v. Merriweather, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90304 (W.D. Tenn. Apr. 15, 2026):
"If it was easy, everybody would be doing it. It isn't, and they don't." —Me
"Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but of playing a poor hand well." –Josh Billings (pseudonym of Henry Wheeler Shaw), Josh Billings on Ice, and Other Things (1868) (erroneously attributed to Robert Louis Stevenson, among others)
“I am still learning.” —Domenico Giuntalodi (but misattributed to Michelangelo Buonarroti (common phrase throughout 1500's)).
"Love work; hate mastery over others; and avoid intimacy with the government."
—Shemaya, in the Thalmud
"It is a pleasant world we live in, sir, a very pleasant world. There are bad people in it, Mr. Richard, but if there were no bad people, there would be no good lawyers."
—Charles Dickens, “The Old Curiosity Shop ... With a Frontispiece. From a Painting by Geo. Cattermole, Etc.” 255 (1848)
"A system of law that not only makes certain conduct criminal, but also lays down rules for the conduct of the authorities, often becomes complex in its application to individual cases, and will from time to time produce imperfect results, especially if one's attention is confined to the particular case at bar. Some criminals do go free because of the necessity of keeping government and its servants in their place. That is one of the costs of having and enforcing a Bill of Rights. This country is built on the assumption that the cost is worth paying, and that in the long run we are all both freer and safer if the Constitution is strictly enforced." —Williams v. Nix, 700 F. 2d 1164, 1173 (8th Cir. 1983) (Richard Sheppard Arnold, J.), rev'd Nix v. Williams, 467 US. 431 (1984).
"The criminal goes free, if he must, but it is the law that sets him free. Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws, or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence." —Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 659 (1961).
"Any costs the exclusionary rule are costs imposed directly by the Fourth Amendment."
—Yale Kamisar, 86 Mich.L.Rev. 1, 36 n. 151 (1987).
"There have been powerful hydraulic pressures throughout our history that bear heavily on the Court to water down constitutional guarantees and give the police the upper hand. That hydraulic pressure has probably never been greater than it is today." — Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 39 (1968) (Douglas, J., dissenting).
"The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their property." —Entick v. Carrington, 19 How.St.Tr. 1029, 1066, 95 Eng. Rep. 807 (C.P. 1765)
"It is a fair summary of history to say that the safeguards of liberty have frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people. And so, while we are concerned here with a shabby defrauder, we must deal with his case in the context of what are really the great themes expressed by the Fourth Amendment." —United States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56, 69 (1950) (Frankfurter, J., dissenting)
"The course of true law pertaining to searches and seizures, as enunciated here, has not–to put it mildly–run smooth." —Chapman v. United States, 365 U.S. 610, 618 (1961) (Frankfurter, J., concurring).
"A search is a search, even if it happens to disclose nothing but the bottom of a turntable." —Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 325 (1987)
"For the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. ... But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected." —Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967)
“Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” —United States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1925) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)
“Liberty—the freedom from unwarranted intrusion by government—is as easily lost through insistent nibbles by government officials who seek to do their jobs too well as by those whose purpose it is to oppress; the piranha can be as deadly as the shark.” —United States v. $124,570, 873 F.2d 1240, 1246 (9th Cir. 1989)
"You can't always get what you want / But if you try sometimes / You just might find / You get what you need." —Mick Jagger & Keith Richards, Let it Bleed (album, 1969)
"In Germany, they first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Catholic. Then they came for me–and by that time there was nobody left to speak up."
—Martin Niemöller (1945) [he served seven years in a concentration camp]
“Children grow up thinking the adult world is ordered, rational, fit for purpose. It’s crap. Becoming a man is realising that it’s all rotten. Realising how to celebrate that rottenness, that’s freedom.” – John le Carré, The Night Manager (1993), line by Richard Roper
"The point of the Fourth Amendment, which often is not grasped by zealous officers, is not that it denies law enforcement the support of the usual inferences which reasonable men draw from evidence. Its protection consists in requiring that those inferences be drawn by a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being judged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime." —Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 13-14 (1948)
The book was dedicated in the first (1982) and sixth (2025) editions to Justin William Hall (1975-2025). He was three when this project started in 1978.
