The affidavit for warrant for a cell phone relies entirely on the general use of cell phones in the drug trade. There’s no more, and that’s not probable cause. Still, however, the good faith exception saves it. United States v. Darks, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 243249 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 23, 2026).
The validity of defendant’s statement depends on the validity of the stop. The district court found the stop was with probable cause of a traffic violation, so it’s valid. United States v. Kendrick, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 31995 (11th Cir. Oct. 21, 2026).*
Plaintiff was on notice of his search claim, at the latest when it was mentioned during his criminal trial, which was two years and one month before the suit was filed, so it’s barred by limitations. Kunkle v. Holcomb, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 32254 (7th Cir. Oct. 21, 2026).*
Posted inAutomatic license plate readers|Comments Off on Reason: Iowa Voters Don’t Want Police or Flock Tracking Their Cars. Politicians Are Still Catching Up.
The lack of a bodycam video of the search doesn’t mean the officer can’t be believed. On the totality, there was probable cause. The trial court found the officer credible, and that gets deference on appeal. The state statute on an adverse jury instruction on lack of a body camera has no application to suppression hearings. State v. Saunders, 2026 UT App 161, 2026 Utah App. LEXIS 219 (Oct. 22, 2026) (§ 42.05).
The minor mistakes in the affidavit weren’t material to the probable cause finding. The cell phone here was given to another two months before it was seized, so defendant abandoned it. United States v. King, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 242810 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 23, 2026).*
The statement that defendant made money of his legal marijuana business was false by Franks standards because part of it was known to be illegitimate. Also, the warrants were not overbroad. United States v. Bregman, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 242904 (D. Neb. Oct. 23, 2026).* [Note: In defendant’s interrogation, he was asked whether he paid the fee directly to the co-defendant’s lawyer.]
Defendant was stopped for a warrant for violation of the terms of his supervised release. A search incident of his car was permissible under Gant. United States v. Briggs, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 242751 (W.D. La. Oct. 22, 2026).
Defendant is charged with theft by shoplifting from a military base exchange. The government argues a lack of standing in what was stolen where a pants pocket was searched. The lack of standing here, however, depends on fraud or theft which is to be proved at trial, not a suppression hearing. United States v. Álvarez, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 242580 (D.P.R. Oct. 21, 2026).*
When defendant was arrested, a firearm he had was cleared for officer safety, and bullets and a spring came out. Defendant challenges admissibility under F.R.E. 104 [that’s a new one on me; that’s a chain of custody issue which is weight, not admissibility]. Denied. It’s not materially different. United States v. Fuller, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 242606 (S.D. Ill. Oct. 22, 2026).*
Search incident inside defendant’s shorts was reasonable where it didn’t become a strip search or exposed his genitals. Smith v. Commonwealth, 2026 Va. App. LEXIS 550 (Oct. 20, 2026) (unpublished).
Plaintiff was taken to a mental health unit based on a petition and court order, so the officer was justified. French v. Cmty. Mental Health of Clinton, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 239921 (W.D. Mich. Oct. 20, 2026).*
The minor errors in the search warrant application don’t add up to material omissions affecting probable cause. United States v. Williams, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 240111 (E.D. Va. Oct. 20, 2026).*
The protective sweep was in conjunction with an arrest warrant, and it was reasonable. They saw smashed cell phones and other attempts to destroy evidence. United States v. Cadet, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 240523 (S.D. Tex. Oct. 21, 2026).*
Defendant was handcuffed because he was uncooperative during basic questions about the accident he was walking away from, where the officer believed he was involved. On the totality, this was not unreasonable. The officer here was responding to an OnStar report of a car crash in a rural area. OnStar got no response from the car. As he neared the scene, he encountered defendant walking on the road, and the officer attempted to talk to him. Defendant didn’t want to answer. The officer ordered him to stop, and there was reasonable suspicion at this point: Defendant leaned when he walked, like he was intoxicated, and he was inappropriately dressed to be merely walking on a rural road in the dead of winter. People v. Evans, 2026 Mich. App. LEXIS 8873 (Oct. 20, 2026)*:
Defendant’s vehicle in his driveway 2-3 steps from the sidewalk was not on the curtilage. United States v. Polk, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 238708 (S.D. Ga. Oct. 19, 2026).
“The Court finds, based on the totality of the circumstances, that there was the requisite nexus to establish probable cause to support the challenged warrant. The real question defendant poses is whether there is a fair probability that a person would conceal evidence of a crime–in particular, a firearm–at a residence that they visited frequently, before and immediately after they allegedly were involved in a shooting, parked their one vehicle and two rental vehicles at, contacted via cell phone a resident of 685 times over two months, was the residence of someone with whom they were a ‘close associate,’ and where it was likely they were currently located on the date law enforcement requested the search warrant and where the vehicle they drove to and from the shooting was parked. The Court finds that the answer to that question is yes.” United States v. Robertson, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 239173 (N.D. Iowa Oct. 20, 2026).*
The seizure of defendant’s cell phone at the time of his arrest was reasonable on the totality of circumstances. Maldonado v. Gilroy, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 239458 (M.D. Pa. Oct. 20, 2026).*
Posted inCell phones, Curtilage, Nexus|Comments Off on S.D.Ga.: Def’s car in driveway next to sidewalk was not on curtilage
An open source database internet search after the search in this case that showed defendant resided at the place to be searched after the search didn’t prove he wasn’t at the time of the search under Franks. Perryman v. United States, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 239448 (S.D. Ind. Oct. 20, 2026)*:
Posted inFranks doctrine|Comments Off on S.D.Ind.: Post search database search of occupants of a place didn’t show SW affidavit was false at time it issued
“[A] warrant supported by probable cause is required when law enforcement seeks either historical or real-time CSLI data, unless an exception to the warrant requirement or the exclusionary rule applies.” The state pled that the exigency exception applied because this was an ongoing robbery scheme. But, “Detective Estantino did not provide any specific or articulable facts to support her belief that there was an ongoing risk to public safety. Nor do the facts in the record support such a belief.” No gunshots, yet. People v. Andrade, 2026 Cal. App. LEXIS 672 (6th Dist. Oct. 20, 2026).
Officers had reasonable suspicion to continue this stop. United States v. Salyer, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 238400 (E.D. Tenn. Oct. 19, 2026).*
Reasonable suspicion from jail calls about apparent drug deals justified extending this stop. United States v. Salyer, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 238400 (E.D. Tenn. Oct. 19, 2026).*
Here is the part most people do not expect: the show is produced by AI, start to finish. The system pulls the week’s opinions, filters for search and seizure issues, writes the script, does multiple hallucination checks, voices it, and publishes it. Each episode says so up front. I do not have to record a thing.
AI sometimes sucks. Haven’t tried this one, and I won’t. I have to read them all for the supplement to the Treatise, and I actually love it. Been doing it since 2004. And not every published case matters in the overall scheme of 4A litigation, and plenty of unpublished do.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on AI reads you 4A cases
This search with a warrant was preceded by a protective sweep. Observations made during the sweep made it into the warrant affidavit. Assuming without deciding the sweep was unreasonable, there was sufficient other probable cause for the warrant. Founds v. State, 2026 Md. LEXIS 562 (Sep. 30, 2026).
The warrant was particular. “That place was the apartment behind the ‘rear red door with white trim,’ which, ‘when looking at [the] rear of [the] property,’ was ‘the door to the right.’ …. That specific description was the premises to be searched in the warrant. So, it was not a general warrant for the entire building, but a warrant specifically authorizing the search of the apartment behind that door.” It did not just include searching the door. United States v. Gladden, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 237270 (M.D. Pa. Oct. 16, 2026).*
Defendant doesn’t get to file a motion to suppress out of time. While the indictment changed slightly, not enough to affect that. Also, adding new counsel doesn’t justify it either. United States v. Crosby, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 238139 (W.D. Mo. Sep. 24, 2026).*
Defendant’s cell phone was seized at ATL Customs for a border search, and it went elsewhere for a forensic search. That search was still a border search. United States v. Vereen, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 238218 (N.D. Ga. Sep. 1, 2026).*
The affidavit showed nexus and probable cause to his car and house. As to the house: “The affidavit also demonstrated a sufficient nexus between Tooley’s drug trafficking and the Brockton house. Agents’ surveillance of the property and the location data from Tooley’s cell phone supported a reasonable — indeed, strong — inference that Tooley was living at the house. And during their September 10 FaceTime calls before the controlled purchase, Tooley showed CW-1 how he was cooking the cocaine himself and weighed the drugs on a scale.” United States v. Tooley, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 238230 (D. Mass. Oct. 19, 2026).*
“Here, according to Plaintiff’s allegations, Officer Gill responded to an attempted assault on Plaintiff by pointing her gun at Plaintiff, the victim. … Gill continued to brandish her firearm at Plaintiff even as Crimm continued to stab Plaintiff. Id. Weighing these facts under the Graham factors, this Court finds that Plaintiff states a claim under § 1983 for violation of his Fourth Amendment rights.” Young v. Gill, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 238287 (E.D. Mo. Oct. 19, 2026).*
Dicta: While Ohio law is silent on whether a state officer could make an arrest for violation of federal marijuana law, it likely wouldn’t violate the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Whitlow 134 F.4th 914 (6th Cir. 2025); United States v. Garrett, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 31568 (6th Cir. Oct. 16, 2026).
There was probable cause for a warrant for video and audio from two doorbell cameras catching the crime. Alternatively, the good faith exception applies. The government raises standing, which isn’t decided. United States v. Rodrigues, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 236878 (D. Mass. Oct. 16, 2026).*
The bodycam video supports the officer’s conclusion the windows were overtinted. United States v. Harris, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 237230 (E.D. Tenn. Sep. 30, 2026).*
Defendant’s car was searched under the automobile exception in his driveway. There’s a fence and gate between the car on the driveway and the front door. All things considered under Dunn, this driveway is not the curtilage. “The driveway is not enclosed nor is it protected from observation. … The driveway is part of an area that is easily visible and accessible to others—especially the occupants of nearby townhouses. … Four other vehicles were parked in the same continuous driveway …” “Finally, the Court concludes the driveway is not used for an ‘intimate activity associated with the sanctity of a man’s home and privacies of life.’ Dunn, 480 U.S. at 300 (citation modified).” United States v. Trujillo, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 237410 (D.N.M. Oct. 16, 2026).
The officer’s omission of another IP address from the affidavit for search warrant isn’t material to the probable cause finding. United States v. Perrote, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 236805 (W.D. Wis. Oct. 15, 2026).*
The search incident of defendant’s bag was reasonable, and consent doesn’t even have to be decided. United States v. Guardipee, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 236100 (D. Mont. Oct. 15, 2026).*
Defendant’s friend had common authority over the phone to consent, including knowing the passcode. United States v. Cook, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 31506 (6th Cir. Oct. 16, 2026).
Defendant consented to the search of his cell phone left with an officer when he was going to his PO. United States v. Fetters, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 235678 (D. Kan. Oct. 14, 2026).*
“Officers are not required to continue investigating once they have probable cause. See Stokes v. Bd. of Educ. of the City of Chi., 599 F.3d 617, 624 (7th Cir. 2010) (‘While an officer may not close his or her eyes to clearly exculpatory facts, the Fourth Amendment does not require an officer with probable cause to arrest to wait while pursuing further investigation.’).” United States v. Canfield, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 236651 (E.D. Wis. Oct. 15, 2026).*
Since marijuana is legal in the Virgin Islands, the smell of marijuana from a car is no longer probable cause for a search. People v. Thomas, 2026 V.I. LEXIS 44 (Super. Ct. Oct. 6, 2026).
Petitioner does not get a CoA on his ineffective assistance of counsel claim for not raising a Fourth Amendment claim that could not prevail for lack of standing. Sindone v. Garcia, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 31449 (6th Cir. Oct. 15, 2026).*
Officers had reasonable suspicion and then probable cause for defendant’s stop. His eluding after that supported it. United States v. Requejo-Garcia, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 235645 (W.D. Okla. Oct. 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.
