The email warrant was particular enough. While a large volume of information was provided by Google, it was then particularly searched, and that satisfies Rule 41 and the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Garcia, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9434 (D. Colo. Jan. 16, 2026).
A 141-day delay in getting a federal search warrant for defendant’s cell phone was not unreasonable, all things considered. United States v. Thibou, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 1299 (6th Cir. Jan. 16, 2026).*
The record is incomplete on whether defendant consented. Any ruling would be based on a hypothetical. State v. Anderson, 2026 Kan. LEXIS 6 (Jan. 16, 2026).*
ICE protestors have standing to assert Fourth Amendment claims against unlawful uses of force against them because they will continue. The possibility of a recurrence is more than speculative. Arrests of peaceful protestors is enjoined. High likelihood of success on the merits. Tincher v. Noem, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9436 (D. Minn. Jan. 16, 2026).*
The state used a search warrant to access the defense expert’s work product in a sex case. The court held hearings and found that the attorney-client work product was not accessed by the state but ordered the data product of the search destroyed, refusing to dismiss the case as a sanction. Affirmed. State v. Camara, 2026 UT App 5, 2026 Utah App. LEXIS 5 (Jan. 15, 2026).
A search warrant was executed at a property defendant sometimes stayed at that he failed to tell USPO about. Enough here for detention pending final hearing. United States v. Copeland, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8754 (N.D. Fla. Jan. 16, 2026).*
Defendant’s traffic stop led to reasonable suspicion he was driving under the influence. United States v. Rivers, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9161 (S.D. Ga. Jan. 16, 2026).*
The in camera submissions of the Attorney General on this FISA warrant satisfy the FISA requirements. And there is probable cause. United States v. Terry, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9227 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 16, 2026).*
Posted inFISA, Reasonable suspicion, Warrant execution|Comments Off on UT: State used SW to get defense expert’s computer data; ordered destroyed, but case not dismissed
Responding to a call, defendant fairly matched the description. When he would not identify himself, it was reasonable to handcuff him for a few minutes while it was sorted out. United States v. Troupe, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9010 (E.D. Mo. Jan. 16, 2026).*
Police were called because two men renting a U-Haul truck were suspicious according to the rental agent. They were handcuffed for 10 minutes then released. There are questions of fact about all this. Summary judgment denied. Lee v. Budde, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8651 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 15, 2026).*
In executing an anticipatory warrant for a package, officers could also use that same probable cause and past knowledge of the defendant to search his vehicle on the apartment complex’s parking lot. Diverting the package from one city to another when in transit didn’t require reasonable suspicion but they had it anyway. United States v. Dawson, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8941 (D. Haw. Jan. 16, 2026).*
The dog handler’s testimony that the dog was certified before this sniff was sufficient to show the dog was reliable. State v. Murphy, 2026-Ohio-143 (2d Dist. Jan. 13, 2026).
Search warrants can be based on hearsay. Mendenhall v. City & Cty. of Denver, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 1187 (10th Cir. Jan. 16, 2026).*
Any minor offense justifies a stop. “Based on Deputy Anthony Crawford’s credible testimony and the lack of any evidence contradicting it, Judge Nelson correctly determined that Deputy Crawford had a reasonable basis to believe the defendant committed a traffic violation and therefore probable cause existed to initiate the traffic stop.” United States v. Ausherman, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8752 (D. Neb. Jan. 16, 2026).*
There is no Fourth Amendment claim for a prison cell search. Muhammad v. Piston, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8690 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 15, 2026).*
The court was asked to issue a search warrant for execution 6 am to 9 pm. The court required 9-2 so children won’t be around. The officer agreed, the ADA did not. This explains why that’s a reasonable restriction. Matter of Application for a Search Warrant, 2026 NY Slip Op 50027(U), 2026 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 46 (Queens Co. Jan. 12, 2026).
Defendant was stopped for a traffic violation in a high crime area. Officers asked if he was armed and he said he was. Further computer inquiries showed he was a felon. That reasonably led to a search of the car. United States v. Claybon, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 271021 (E.D. Mo. Nov. 25, 2025).*
Things seized by officers under a search warrant, other than stolen property, can be subject to forfeiture under state law. Commonwealth v. Ivarson, 2026 Mass. App. LEXIS 6 (Jan. 16, 2026).*
SnapChat viewing a 16-second video that came through its system was a private search. It was not unreasonable for officers to view it too without a warrant when SnapChat sent it to the police. Then that led to a warrant for defendant’s place. State v. Gasper, 2026 WI 3, 2026 Wisc. LEXIS 4 (Jan. 14, 2026).
The officer’s stop of defendant led to observations that added up to reasonable suspicion that defendant, a convicted felon, might be armed. United States v. Mack, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 271002 (N.D. Ga. Dec. 23, 2025).*
Defendant’s purse left in the house when the police arrived was subject to search under the warrant. Even if the good faith exception applied, there would be no appreciable deterrence from suppression here. United States v. Bryant, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8274 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 15, 2026).*
Defendant used a homeless resource center by day for taking showers. He was not an overnight guest and had no standing in the shower dressing area. State v. Zackaria, 2026 ME 2, 2026 Me. LEXIS 2 (Jan. 13, 2026).
Officers could enter the home here based on a domestic violence call seeing an injured woman at the door. United States v. Leaven, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 270999 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 22, 2025).*
Requiring an ID before filing a document in court under state law is not an unreasonable Fourth Amendment seizure. Hill-Yisra’El v. McCord, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8458 (M.D. Ga. Jan. 15, 2026).*
Plaintiff’s search at an international airport is not sufficiently like Bivens that it’s unlikely SCOTUS would recognize this as a cause of action. Benderoff v. Johansen, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 1094 (6th Cir. Jan. 13, 2026).*
Defendant was in custody for Miranda when a warrant was executed at his house at 6 am and he was taken outside, separated from his family, and ziptied but told he was not under arrest. State v. Magana-Arevalo, 2026 Wash. LEXIS 59 (Jan. 15, 2026).
The warrant was for defendant’s premises, and it mentioned storage sheds and a camper on the property. The camper was subject to search under the warrant. United States v. Barsalou, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7419 (D. Vt. Jan. 12, 2026).*
A threat to tow an illegally parked vehicle is not a seizure. Metrospeedy Operations, LLC v. Nordstrom, 2025 NY Slip Op 34963(U) (N.Y. Co. Dec. 19, 2025).*
“Here, the problem with Mims’s argument is that if the elements of the Facebook warrant to which he objects are stricken, the warrant is still supported by sufficient probable cause and a sufficient nexus. In other words, even if Shanks’s statements were reckless misstatements (which the Court finds they were not), they were not material.” So no Franks violation. United States v. Mims, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7816 (N.D. Okla. Jan. 15, 2026).*
Posted inCurtilage, Custody, Franks doctrine, Seizure|Comments Off on WA: SW at 6 am, ziptied, questioned, but told he wasn’t under arrest is still custody
The officer believed defendant’s name was on an old warrant list they get from the magistrates once every week or two. The age of the list denied individualized suspicion. It wasn’t checked before the stop (even though it turned out there was still a warrant). State v. Robles, 2026 N.M. App. LEXIS 3 (Jan. 15, 2026):
The Intercept: FBI Raid on WaPo Reporter’s Home Was Based on Sham Pretext (“On Wednesday morning, the FBI raided the home of Washington Post journalist Hannah Natanson in an alarming escalation of the Trump administration’s war on press freedom. The raid can be seen as a direct result of Attorney General Pam Bondi’s decision last year to reverse media protections for journalists from having their records searched during leak investigations — a decision that was a sham from the start. The search of Natanson’s home was allegedly part of an investigation into a government contractor, Aurelio Perez-Lugones, who is accused of illegally retaining classified information. Press freedom advocates have said the raid violates federal law and endangers First Amendment freedoms. The Post also received a subpoena related to Perez-Lugones on Wednesday morning, according to the paper’s own reporting. Bondi laid the groundwork for this problematic search nearly a year ago, when she rescinded Biden-era media guidelines that protected reporters from being compelled to disclose their sources or having their records searched.”)
Because he’s in custody, defendant has a diminished expectation of getting his cell phone back. The slight delay in getting a warrant has no case law cited in support, not that it matters. United States v. Holloman, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6911 (N.D. Ga. Jan. 14, 2026).
“Even confining our own analysis to uncontested information and including omitted facts, the Whisenand Affidavit supported a probable cause finding in spades.” Economan v. Luttrull, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 906 (7th Cir. Jan. 12, 2026).*
Defendant received constitutionally adequate notice of forfeiture, certified mail to the jail twice, which he claims he never saw. United States v. Marte, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6918 (D.N.H. Jan. 14, 2026).* [What? Jails fail to deliver mail inside? They sure do. Or take four weeks to deliver something after obvious receipt.]
Unjustifiably slamming plaintiff to the ground states a claim against one defendant, not the others. Humble v. Harris Cnty., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7036 (S.D. Tex. Jan. 14, 2026).*
Search incident of a car after DUI arrest was reasonable under Gant. United States v. Peralta, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7341 (D. Kan. Jan. 13, 2026). [It could also be argued that the automobile exception would work here, too, when looking for open containers.]
Petitioner claims an extradition request from Turkey fails the Fourth Amendment because it didn’t include all the elements of the crime, which would allegedly show he couldn’t be extradited because of a lack of offense. The request was supplemented, now it does. Denied. Tok v. Nessigner, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7119 (D.R.I. Jan. 14, 2026).*
The decedent was having a mental health breakdown when the police seized him, and he later died. ADA didn’t have to be complied with, and the Fourth Amendment seizure was reasonable. Booth v. Lazzara, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 936 (6th Cir. Jan. 14, 2026).*
Plaintiff claims an abusive unnecessary strip search, but the bodycams don’t back it up. Turcios v. Vittetoe, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7304 (N.D. Ga. Jan. 14, 2026).*
A nondisclosure order in a search warrant to an electronic service provider does not violate state law or the First Amendment. Microsoft Corp. v. Superior Court, 2026 Cal. App. LEXIS 17 (2d Dist. Jan. 14, 2026):
On a traffic stop, the juvenile was recognized from a BOLO as missing. That then involved the community caretaking function. Commonwealth v. Demos D., 2026 Mass. LEXIS 6 (Jan. 13, 2026).
There was reasonable suspicion for stopping plaintiff where he was found where the police were pursuing a suspect and briefly lost him, and plaintiff fairly matched the description and had similar colored clothes. Wolterman v. Syverson, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 879 (8th Cir. Jan. 14, 2026).*
Clearly established law for qualified immunity requires it be from the same circuit. Root v. Comstock, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 886 (10th Cir. Jan. 14, 2026).*
The district court’s Franks findings against defendant are not clearly erroneous. United States v. Irvin, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 901 (3d Cir. Jan. 14, 2026).*
A shotspotter alert brought the police to this house, and the police went around looking for signs of anyone that might be injured. Within 20 seconds it was apparent there wasn’t, but then they looked for spent shell casings in the dark in the grass. That was beyond the initial call and community caretaking function. The reference to shell casings in the affidavit didn’t mention this intensive search, and implied plain view. That was misleading. The motion to suppress should be granted. United States v. Davis, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 270386 (E.D. Mo. Dec. 12, 2025) (R&R).
This affidavit was [clearly] sufficient. “Nevertheless, even if an affidavit contains deficiencies, where ‘the existence of probable cause presents a close question on which reasonable minds could differ—or even that probable cause was in fact lacking—suppression would nonetheless be unwarranted under the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule.’” Torres-Carmona v. State, 2026 Fla. App. LEXIS 305 (Fla. 2d DCA Jan. 14, 2026).*
This was a felony arrest, and a warrant isn’t required as long as there’s probable cause. Here, there was plenty. United States v. Ceasar, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6691 (S.D. Ohio Jan. 13, 2026).*
If a law enforcement officer is never trained on the Fourth Amendment, does he or she get the benefit of the good faith exception or reasonableness? Don’t both require some “understanding” by definition? See Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1928) (Brandeis, J., dissenting) (“Experience should teach us to be most on our 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.”)
Posted inReasonableness|Comments Off on 4A reasonableness
Brigham City’s “objectively reasonable basis for believing” someone inside needs emergency assistance doesn’t mean probable cause. That’s best left to criminal investigations. Case v. Montana, 2026 U.S. LEXIS 432 (Jan. 14, 2026). Syllabus by the Court:
Defendant’s simple [nonaggressive] refusal to comply with a search warrant for his DNA for 12 days was admissible at trial. [There’s also a prior discussion that suggests harmless error.] Lee v. Commonwealth, 2026 Va. App. LEXIS 32 (Jan. 13, 2026).
Defendant didn’t preserve the probable cause for his arrest, but there was anyway. Lack of a carry license isn’t an element of the crime that the state has to disprove under Bruen, which was decided way later. People v. Rodriguez, 2026 NY Slip Op 00100 (1st Dept. Jan. 13, 2026)* (the conviction was March 19, 2019, nearly seven years ago).
The district court properly concluded that the video of the stop undermined plaintiff’s claims. Gilliam v. Fields, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 805 (11th Cir. Jan. 13, 2026).*
Unintended shooting target: “When an officer fires at a dog, is there a seizure of the dog’s owner when the stray bullet hits her instead? We conclude the answer is no.” Hight v. Williams, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 781 (8th Cir. Jan. 13, 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]
“You know, most men would get discouraged by now. Fortunately for you, I am not most men!” ---Pepé Le Pew
"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.
