Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

K. Electronic surveillance

State v. Ronald Lee Baric, 2018 WI App 63; case activity (including briefs) Police failed to read Baric his Miranda rights, but the court of appeals still found that he consented to a search of his computer. It also resolved a 4th Amendment issue of first impression for Wisconsin: a person has no reasonable expectation of… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Dahda v. United States, USSC No. 17-43, 2018 WL 2186173 (May 14, 2018), affirming United States v. Dahda, 853 F.3d 1101 (10th Cir. 2017); Scotusblog page (including links to briefs and commentary) This decision will be important to federal criminal defense practitioners dealing with evidence obtained with wiretap orders issued under 18 U.S.C. § 2510 et seq… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Dahda v. United States, USSC No. 17-43, certiorari granted 10/16/17 Question presented: Whether Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510–2520, requires suppression of evidence obtained pursuant to a wiretap order that is facially insufficient because the order exceeds the judge’s territorial jurisdiction. Lower court decision… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Samuel Silverstein, 2017 WI App 64; case activity (including briefs) Pursuant to a warrant, police searched Silverstein’s computer for child porn. The “informer” was Tumblr, which is required by federal law to report suspected child pornography to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Silverstein challenged the warrant as well as the mandatory… Read More

{ 0 comments }

The 4th Amendment has been described by Conservative HQ as “one of the most important arrows in the quiver against bullying big government.” Because the government doesn’t just search and seize paper–it also goes after your cell phones, your Facebook account, your email (even when stored on Google’s server), your tweets, your DNA (by definition… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Kelly M. Rindfleisch, 2014 WI App 121; case activity Just how “particular” must a warrant to search a Gmail and Yahoo! Mail be in order to survive the Fourth Amendment’s “particularity” requirement? And does the answer change when the warrant is for searching the email accounts of someone other than the person suspected of the crime… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Price G. Turner, III, 2014 WI App 93; case activity A minor does not as a matter of law lack the capacity to consent to police interception of the minor’s conversations with another person and therefore vicarious consent by a parent is not required. After Turner’s 15-year-old daughter told police Turner had been sexually assaulting… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Bobby L. Tate, 2014 WI 89, 7/24/14, affirming an unpublished court of appeals decision; majority opinion by Justice Roggensack; case activity State v. Nicolas Subdiaz-Osorio, 2014 WI 87, 7/24/14, affirming an unpublished per curiam court of appeals decision; lead opinion by Justice Prosser; case activity In two decisions consisting of 8 separate opinions spread out across… Read More

{ 0 comments }