In a decision authored by Justice Alito last week, the Supreme Court found that laws imposing criminal penalties for refusal to take a breath test do not violate the Fourth Amendment’s ban on unreasonable searches, but that criminal penalties for refusal to take a blood test do.
A “cadre of armed state and federal agents” and a helicopter “orbiting above” was insufficient to establish involuntary coercion of a defendant’s consent to his home, according to the Fifth Circuit.
“No Trespassing” signs do not per se prevent officers from conducting a knock and talk at a residence.
The Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently held that the procedural violations of FBI agents in failing to provide sufficient notice of a warrant did not violate a defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights.
The United States Government investigated Mr. David Levy for his role in a stock manipulation scheme. Mr. Levy was aware that he faced potential criminal charges; his wife had been indicted in a related matter nearly a year earlier, and his attorney held a telephone conversation with federal prosecutors to discuss potential charges against Mr. Levy.
Law enforcement entry into a home, over the homeowner’s objection, was justified because officers reasonably believed a person inside was potentially unable to communicate and held against her will or otherwise in danger, the Eighth Circuit held.
Where an officer was indisputably engaged in an ongoing criminal investigation when a warrantless search occurred, the community caretaking exception to the Fourth Amendment did not apply, the First Circuit recently held.
To the extent a plaintiff attempts to use a suit to challenge his criminal conviction in the Court of Federal Claims, that court lacks jurisdiction to hear it, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently held.
Court orders for collection of DNA evidence from police officers for the sole purpose of excluding those officers as sources of DNA found at a crime scene is constitutionally permissible, according to the Ninth Circuit.
Special Agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives began investigating Mr. Michael Weaver in 2008. Agents searched through trash outside his home and found marijuana.
The Ninth Circuit recently held that a probationer’s Fourth Amendment right to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures was violated when probation officers conducted suspicionless searches of his cell phone.
Evidence seized during an unconstitutional stop may be used against a defendant where law enforcement discovers an outstanding, valid arrest warrant for the stopped individual, the U.S. Supreme Court held this week.
Warrantless pinging of defendant’s cell phone was reasonable where government proved good faith belief immediate apprehension was necessary after defendant was dangerous and linked to a body of person the government had approached to be an informant, says Second Circuit.
A bottling company and its employees recently brought Bivens claims against federals agents for violating their Fourth Amendment rights when executing a white collar search warrant. The Eighth Circuit held that the agents’ actions were reasonable.
Mr. Amir Meshal a United States citizen and resident of New Jersey, traveled to Mogadishu, Somalia in 2006 to further his study of Islam. In early 2007, Somalia experienced an outbreak of violence causing many civilians to flee the country for neighboring Kenya.
Last week, the Fifth Circuit determined that the good faith exception applied to prevent the suppression of evidence obtained after officers used a canine to sniff the perimeter of a garage. The court found unpublished and inconclusive case law sufficient to demonstrate that a dog sniff of a garage is “close enough to the line of validity.”
Yesterday, the First Circuit denied a defendant’s privacy interest in mail addressed to his “personal addresses” that responded to fraudulent invoices the defendant sent to various trade associations.
The Sixth Circuit recently found that metadata used to route communications on wireless phones are business records, created and maintained by wireless carriers. As such, the FBI’s possession of these materials, without a warrant, was not a search under the Fourth Amendment.
The Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed a district court decision granting officers qualified immunity after Tasering Ronald H. Armstrong five times. Mr. Armstrong died of suffocation.
The government may retain computer evidence obtained outside the scope of an original, probable-cause search warrant and prosecute people for crimes based on that evidence, the Justice Department argued this week before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, sitting en banc.