As a result of the search of the residence, the police found a handgun, but a separate individual (not Mr. Gordon) was charged with possession of that weapon. Indeed, the cases cited by defendant predate the "dawn of active New York State constitutionalism" in the 1980s, before which the "state constitutional protection against unreasonable searches and seizures mostly lay judicially dormant" (Robert M. Pitler, Independent State Search and Seizure Constitutionalism: The New York State Court of Appeals' Quest for Principled Decisionmaking, 62 Brook L Rev 1, 103, 213 [1996]). For reasons explained above, Mr. Gordon is correct that adopting the People's position would amount to a substantial deviation from the rule to which we have adhered under both the Fourth Amendment and Article 1, Section 12 of the State Constitution, requiring warrants to provide particularization between vehicles and real property, even when a vehicle is located on real property.[FN3]. Based on the surveillance and undercover purchases, the detectives applied for and obtained a search warrant authorizing a search of "the person of Tyrone Gordon . 2019) Jun 10, 2020 133 Harv. People v Nieves, 36 NY2d 396, 400 [1975] [a person's mere presence on the premises where suspected gambling is occurring is insufficient to justify a search]). While the majority characterizes these cases as setting forth state constitutional lawsimply by retroactively decreeing them to do so (majority op at 19)it is not clear if the majority intends these cases to stand for our contrary interpretation of the Federal Constitution, to form some kind of common-law rule, to be an implied application of the Criminal Procedure Law, or to express a heightened state constitutional standard. Feuerstein askedMagistrate Judge Anne Y. In doing so, we must "marshal[] distinct state texts and histories and draw our [own] conclusions" in order to "dignify state constitutions as independent sources of law" (Jeffrey S. Sutton, 51 Imperfect Solutions: States and the Making of American Constitutional Law 177 [2018]). Two subsequent cases did. Based on that information, the court issued a search warrant authorizing a search of Mr. Gordon's "person" and the "entire premises." Search and Seizure Latest Search Biden Administration Asks Congress to Reauthorize Warrantless Surveillance Law Facing steeper political headwinds than past cycles, the executive branch is. As a consequence, police officers obtained a warrant for the "entire premises" of 529 Monroe Street, notwithstanding the fact that when they applied for the warrant, the police officers knew that the address contained two separate apartmentsone belonging to the suspect of the search, the other to an innocent third party. We explained that: "a warrant must describe the premises to be searched, and this warrant did not include the automobile, which was not on the premises when the police came with the warrant but which was driven into the driveway while police were there, [and therefore] it did not justify [a] search of the car" (id). In light of the Hansen Court's conclusion that there was no probable cause to search the van, the Court certainly did not confront whether the warrant to search the residence covered a search of the van "wherever located." The items that could be seized in the raid were listed as; Why You Need To Take A Look At New RMD Rules: Theyre Flexible, UBS Fuels The Next Decade Of Black Innovation With $3 Million Commitment, This Week In Credit Card News: Visa, Mastercard Pause Crypto Push; Tracking Gun Purchases, Borrowers Receive Student Loan Forgiveness Approval Emails After Court Green-Lights Settlement, Biden May Propose Using Net Investment Income Tax Revenues To Shore Up Medicare, Student Loan Forgiveness: 6 Big Takeaways From Landmark Supreme Court Hearing, Athlete Investors Cant Save Tonals Falling $500 Million Valuation, Mintz, Levin,Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo. Bias May be Implicit in Current Law on Search and Seizure Friday, March 1st, 2019 Beth Karp 48 latin woman opening the front door, white inside Over the past several years, questions about racial bias in law enforcement have commanded a great deal of public attention. 690) and decisional law"]). I disagree. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. South Dakota v Opperman, 428 US 364, 367-368 [1976]; People v Galak, 81 NY2d 463, 467 [1993]). In Hansen, it appears that the Court rejected the argument that the affidavit on which the warrant was issued provided probable cause of trafficking, because it was factually deficient and the trafficking-related allegation was unreliable hearsay, thus undermining the related argument that there was probable cause to search the van as part of a drug business or because it was otherwise connected to the drugs in the house (id.). Opinion by Judge Wilson. Nevertheless, in our view, that does not render our repeated citations to the State Constitution meaningless. The question before us Cases - Search and seizure - {{meta.siteName}} . Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Fourth Amendment case: Supreme Court sides with man who said police Shield to look into the matter. Siegal, one of the top white collar attorneys in the country and a former federal prosecutor, has uncoveredyet another 4th Amendment violation, this one in the Eastern District of New York. The Supreme Court has held that a passing parallel reference to the State and Federal Constitutions is insufficient to satisfy the plain-statement rulei.e., that a case was decided on a state-law ground (see e.g. Your 4th Amendment Rights The 4 th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom from unreasonable search and seizure . The plain import of this language is that a warrant to search a discrete structure ("a building") does not authorize a search of any container located on the grounds upon which the structure is situated ("vehicles at the premises"), because a search of the latter would exceed the scope of the warrant. Those limits have not been honored in this case. The majority's "clarif[ication]" of the cases (which comes nearly a half century later), transforming them into state constitutional decisions, is nothing short of judicial legerdemain (majority op at 19). In Dumper, the search warrant was similarly directed at discrete structures, including "a one story wood frame cottage with white sidewall, green roof" and a "cottage east of a main house" (id. Those expectations must at times give way to "compelling police interest[s]" (People v Class, 63 NY2d 491, 495 [1984], revd and remanded by New York v Class, 475 US 106 [1986], reaffirmed on state constitutional grounds by People v Class, 67 NY2d 431 [1986]). A search and seizure is not valid unless it is based on either a warrant that was issued based on probable cause that a crime had been committed or upon an exception. Five Memphis police officers pleaded not guilty to murder charges in the beating death of Mr. Nichols. The Government obtained a search warrant permitting it to install a Global-Positioning-System (GPS) tracking device on a vehicle registered to respondent Jones's wife. No such connections were made here. This means that law enforcement agents need probable cause, and a warrant in most cases, to search your person or belongings. The activity described in the affidavit, without more, was innocuous and as consistent with innocence as with criminal activity" (id.). Moreover, to the extent to which vehicle searches are authorized in a warrant, the vehicles must be "designated or described" (CPL 690.15 [1] [b]). Attached to the third party's apartment was a shed. it is no less fixed than a suitcase or handbag found on the premises, both of which can readily be searched under Ross if capable of containing the object of the search"]). The defendant controverted the warrant, arguing that it was "constitutionally deficient for not 'particularly describing the place to be searched'" (Rainey, 14 NY2d at 36, citing NY Const, art I, 12; US Const, 4th Amend]). at 402 [the "ultimate mandate of reasonableness" "depend(s) upon the facts and circumstances"]). These protections take shape in two ways . at 299). Here, there is no dispute that the search warrant was supported by probable cause to believe that defendant was involved in narcotics trafficking on his premises, and, unlike the vehicle in Dumper, defendant's vehicles were parked on the premises when the police arrived to execute the warrant. In a 2017 case involving Wall Street financier Benjamin Wey, defense attorney David Siegal, said that FBI agents had gone too far in their search for random items during a raid on Wey's office and residence. Texas court to decide if 2 drug seizures were legal While this Court has not yet had the opportunity to answer it, the question is certainly not a novel one for courts. The garage had a structural and functional existence distinct from defendant's van which should have been recognized by the investigators" (id. Reviewing the warrant materials, Supreme Court concluded that probable cause was lacking in this case because the detective's affidavit made no mention of the vehicles or otherwise "provide[d] any specific probable cause [to believe] that the vehicles were involved in the criminal activity." The authorities of the two countries have worked together to round up statues, vases and bronzes, some of which had appeared in American museums. Shield's allowed government prosecutors to submit their objections but they took a pass saying that they intended toreturn all of the records seized in the raid as well as destroy the electronic images it created as a result of the seized information. The factual allegations, Mr. Gordon contended, supported at most a search of Mr. Gordon's person and his residence and not the vehicles located outside the residence. provided an affidavit to an Eastern District of NYmagistrate judge to request a search of Kayla. California v. Lee, California Court of Appeals 2019. Supreme Court's probable cause analysis is consonant with our prior cases and the record supports its finding, affirmed by the Appellate Division, that the warrant application failed to establish probable cause to search the two vehicles. Before the motion court, defendant argued that he was entitled to suppression because the search of the vehicles fell outside the scope of the warrant. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U. S. 1, 19, n. 16 (1968). However, the constitutional mandate of particularity of the place to be searched may not be circumvented by implication as the People urge. Where a search warrant authorizes the search of premises, a separate showing of probable cause is not required to search containers found on the designated premises, if the object of the search could be found therein. Sign up for our free summaries and get the latest delivered directly to you. Defendant filed a motion to suppress, arguing that the factual allegations did not support a search of the vehicles located outside the residence. I dissent. Posted by Brett McGarry. Siegal, now atMintz, Levin,Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, has won an argument in another case where the FBI got a bit over its skis in a search. Moreover, automobiles, unlike other containers, are typically titled and registered, and are also more often in public view, providing police officers with the means of establishing connections between the vehicle and the target of the search. Rainey did not address whether the need to provide particular probable cause for separate residences extended to providing particularized probable cause for vehicles found at or associated with a residence. We first held that the underlying warrant for the residence lacked sufficient factual allegations to authorize a search of the residence (Dumper, 28 NY2d at 298). People v Gordon
. Get free summaries of new New York Court of Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox! PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee vs. JAIME SISON, LEONARDO YANSON, AND ROSALIE BAUTISTA, Accused. the Legislature uses different terms in various parts of a statute, courts may reasonably infer that different concepts are intended"]). Get free summaries of new Supreme Court of Georgia opinions delivered to your inbox! A Judge of this Court granted the People leave to appeal (33 NY3d 976 [2019]). Illegal Search and Seizure: Recent Dc Court of Appeals Decision G.R. No. 211214 - Lawphil Disclaimer: Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. July 31, 2019. Because the search warrant in this case contained no references to the vehicles and the record supports the finding of Supreme Court that the search warrant materials failed to provide probable cause to search the vehicles, the evidence seized therefrom was properly suppressed. In the appropriate case, Dumper may be relevant in assessing how we would decide that issue, but it is not relevant here. Rather than forthright basing this extreme position on the Fourth Amendment and application of Supreme Court precedenta decision that would theoretically be more readily reviewed by the Supreme Court (perhaps because this Court has now become an outlier and created a "split" in the interpretation of Ross)the majority relies, in some unspecified way, on our case law that not only is inapposite, but also predates Ross and was decided without the benefit of subsequent constitutional law on the import of containers located in the areas designated to be searched in warrants. The reason the warrant did not describe the vehicles in this case, as in Dumper, is that the warrant application materials failed to mention the vehicles, which consequently fell beyond the scope of the warrant. According to the Government, it willnow more than one year after seeking the indictment, more than six years after theexecution of the search, and almost eight years from beginning its investigation into Johnsbusiness ask the grand jury to issue yet another charge against John, by way of anostensible superseding indictment, and to expand on the description and scope of the conductcharged in the current indictment. The officers stopped the man, subjected him to a patdown search, and then inspected the interior of the vehicle for other weapons. But the location of that search was an im-pounded vehiclenot a home"'a constitutional differ-ence'" that the opinion repeatedly stressed.