VoteKansas.org

BIG RAPIDS, Mich. — The objects displayed in Michigan's newest museum range from the ordinary, such as simple ashtrays and fishing lures, to the grotesque — a full-size replica of a lynching tree. But all are united by a common theme: They are steeped in racism so intense that it ...

The affiant police officer misled the issuing magistrate on the question of probable cause, and that nullified the good faith exception. United States v. Albury, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53645 (M.D. Fla. January 19, 2012):

Beginning with Leon, the Supreme Court "recalibrated" the cost-benefit analysis under the exclusionary rule "to focus the inquiry on the 'flagrancy of the police misconduct' at issue." Davis v. United States, __ U.S. __, 131 S.Ct. 2419, 2427 (2011). Thus, "[w]hen the police exhibit 'deliberate,' 'reckless,' or 'grossly negligent' disregard for Fourth Amendment rights, the deterrent value of exclusion is strong and tends to outweigh the resulting costs. But when the police act with an objectively 'reasonable good-faith belief' that their conduct is lawful, or when their conduct involves only simple, 'isolated' negligence, the 'deterrence rationale loses much of its force,' and exclusion 'cannot pay its way.'" Davis, 131 S.Ct. at 2427-28 (citations omitted)..

Here, Off. Waker acted with deliberate indifference to Defendant's Fourth Amendment rights in connection with his search of room 332. The affiant's plain-view sighting of suspected cocaine in that room is the fruit of that illegality. Even if the affiant's representations were not deliberately false on his part, in the circumstances of this case and given Blackwell's unrefuted testimony, they were made with reckless indifference of the truth and misleaded the state judge on the matter of probable cause. In the circumstances, the government may not claim the benefit of an exception to the exclusionary rule under Leon.

Uncorroborated anonymous tip did not provide reasonable suspicion. United States v. Melendez, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53663 (S.D. Fla. April 4, 2012).*

Civil case over search that led to revocation was not barred by Heck because the evidence was admissible, illegal search or not. Henderson v. Davis, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 7646 (11th Cir. April 17, 2012).*

Search warrant after controlled buy was not stale because the collective information showed a continuing operation. United States v. Tisdale, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53294 (D. Kan. April 16, 2012).*

“[A]ny ordinary visitor to Defendant's apartment would have understood Defendant's actions to constitute assent to Officer Jordan's entry into Defendant's apartment.” United States v. Murphy, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52246 (E.D. Tenn. April 13, 2012).*

Defendant lived in the basement of Flynn’s house in St. Louis, and Flynn discovered a meth lab. Flynn called the police and consented to their entry and search. Defendant’s relationship to the basement was difficult and uncertain, so the court assumes standing, but more than one person stayed down there, and it wasn’t clear what his privacy relationship was to the basement. It seemed that it wasn’t sufficiently private that Flynn couldn’t consent. United States v. Hendrix, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53823 (E.D. Mo. March 30, 2012):

In the circumstances of this case, Officer Page and the other officers acted reasonably. When they arrived at 3232 California, they knocked on the front door and it was opened by a man who said he was Thomas Flynn who had phoned them earlier about a meth lab in his basement, operated by a friend of his. He then led the officers to the basement door, which was already open. Flynn had not asked anyone for permission to admit the officers into the residence nor to take the officers to the doorway leading to the basement stairs. His actions reasonably led the officers to believe that, like the woman in the doorway with the baby on her hip in Matlock, Flynn showed he belonged in the residence and had sufficient authority over it, including the basement area, to further authorize the police to enter not only the residence generally but also to go downstairs to investigate the possibly criminal activity about which he had called them. United States v. Almeida-Perez, 549 F.3d 1162, 1170-71 (8th Cir. 2008). The officers' entry into the basement room of defendant was constitutionally authorized by the consent of Thomas Flynn.

Inconsistencies in the officers’ testimony led the court to conclude that consent was not given after a knock-and-talk. United States v. Miranda-Cortez, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53402 (D. Utah April 16, 2012)*:

Because of these inconsistencies and the government's failure to acknowledge or otherwise convincingly explain them, the court concludes that the testimony of the officers involved in this operation is not sufficient to sustain the government's burden to prove it had freely obtained consent to search the basement apartment. The court wants to be clear that it is not impugning the testimony of the officers. Nothing before the court suggests that the officers have intentionally attempted to mislead the court or give knowingly false testimony. Indeed, it is more likely that the officers were distracted by their roles in continuing their deception to gain access to the house and were so overly concentrated on finding the drugs once they entered the basement, that they failed to appreciate all the details of what was occurring.

The officers may well have concluded that they had sufficient evidence to proceed without a warrant. Uncertainty, however, must weigh in favor of the constitutional protections. A pretext pursued with the stated objective of gaining entrance without a warrant may prematurely lead officers to believe they have succeeded in obtaining sufficient concessions from the home occupant to claim it was consent. With no exigencies evident here to justify a departure from the constitutional requirement, the officers rely on the consent exception, which is cluttered with uncertainties and contradictions.

Defendant objected to the alleged consent given by the lady who opened the door and let the police in. That was essentially a moot argument because, once the police were inside, he said he owned the place, and he consented and cooperated with the police. All this happened before the officers saw any evidence of crime. “Mr. Lucas's consent to the officers' presence and search was sufficient to dissipate any taint caused by an illegal initial entry. See U.S. v. Jarvi, 537 F.3d 1256, 1260 (10th Cir. 2008).” United States v. Lucas, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 7746 (10th Cir. April 17, 2012).*

The state showed that the inventory search of defendant’s car was necessary to log the valuables, and defendant did not show that it was in bad faith, so he does not prevail. Boykin v. State, 2012 Ark. App. 274 (April 18, 2012).* [Note: Is the court shifting the burden of proof here? Should the state bare the burden of good faith inventory searches since they always carry the burden?]

Virginia is sure to be one of the top states Republicans will target in 2012. After long voting for Republicans in presidential elections --forty years to be exact-- Barack Obama pulled off an upset with 53% of the vote.

Meanwhile, former Governor and US Senator George Allen looks for a political comeback 6 years after a narrow defeat against Jim Webb. The most recent polling data in the state gives Romney a 46-41% lead over Obama among registered voters in the presidential contest, while Allen leads Kaine by 46-39% in the senate battle.

Virginia is almost must-win for the Romney campaign. Given the recent trends in the state, the odds should be in his favor. Read - Battleground 2012: Virginia.

Photo: Pool Photo, Getty Images News

Romney, Allen Look for Virginia Victories originally appeared on About.com Conservative Politics: U.S. on Thursday, April 19th, 2012 at 08:32:00.

Permalink | Comment | Email this

FALLBROOK, Calif. — Authorities have determined that a body found near a Southern California lake is that of Brittany Dawn Killgore, a Marine's wife whose disappearance has led to the arrest of another woman on suspicion of murder.

Neighbors were stunned Wednesday when coroner investigators announced that it was the ...

CLEVELAND — Sixteen Amish men and women face arraignment Thursday in federal court on charges involved in beard- and hair-cutting attacks against fellow Amish in Ohio.

An updated indictment filed last month added new allegations that the suspects tried to hide or destroy evidence, including a disposable camera, shears and ...

DAYTON, Ohio — The roar of B-25 bomber engines still echoed overhead as 96-year-old Richard E. Cole slowly walked to the podium Wednesday afternoon.

The Army Air Forces veteran, one of the five remaining survivors of Doolittle's Tokyo Raid, was unfazed by the pomp and circumstance around him, as well ...

NEW YORK — The admitted mastermind of a foiled suicide attack on the New York City subways says he learned formulas for homemade bombs while at an al Qaeda training compound in Pakistan in 2008.

Najibullah Zazi testified for a second day Wednesday at the Brooklyn trial of Adis Medunjanin.

The author of the nation's laws to protect human-trafficking victims said Wednesday he supports Catholic bishops in their efforts to overturn a federal judge's ruling and correct what they view as an "abuse of power" by the Obama administration.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) "has been a dedicated, ...

NEW ORLEANS — BP and attorneys for more than 100,000 people and businesses presented a federal judge Wednesday with a class-action settlement designed to resolve billions of dollars in claims spawned by the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

The London-based oil giant and the attorneys are asking ...

ORLANDO, Fla. — The Florida judge presiding over the Trayvon Martin shooting case removed herself Wednesday after the attorney for defendant George Zimmerman argued she had possible conflicts of interest that related to her husband.

Florida Circuit Judge Jessica Recksiedler had said she would make a decision by Friday, when ...

LONG BEACH, Calif. — Prosecutors Wednesday announced they had decided not to press charges against an 11-year-old girl who fought with a 10-year-old schoolmate hours before the younger girl died.

The death of Joanna Ramos, which attracted national attention and sparked a debate on school violence, came after a "fight ...

AJC.com: Op-ed: Poor people not excluded from Constitution by Jay Bookman:

Here we go again.

On April 15, 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Georgia law that required candidates to be tested for illegal drugs before they could run for public office. In “Chandler v. Miller”, the court ruled that the tests amounted to an unreasonable, unjustified search of a person’s body that is forbidden under the Fourth Amendment.

“However well-meant, the candidate drug test Georgia has devised diminishes personal privacy for a symbol’s sake,” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote in the 8-1 decision, joined by justices such as Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

NYTimes.com: No Savings Are Found From Welfare Drug Tests by Lizette Alvarez:

Ushered in amid promises that it would save taxpayers money and deter drug users, a Florida law requiring drug tests for people who seek welfare benefits resulted in no direct savings, snared few drug users and had no effect on the number of applications, according to recently released state data.

Many states are considering following Florida’s example, and the new data from the state shows they shouldn’t,” said Derek Newton, communications director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, which sued the state last year to stop the testing and recently obtained the documents. “Not only is it unconstitutional and an invasion of privacy, but it doesn’t save money, as was proposed.”