Skip to content
Name: People v. Campos (2024) 98 Cal.App.5th 1281
Case #: F084307
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 01/22/2024

The government did not properly notify defendant pursuant to the California Electronic Privacy Communications Act (Pen. Code, § 1546 et. seq.) where it relied on third party providers to notify defendant of government-compelled information. As part of a murder investigation, police sought and obtained warrants for Facebook account information of defendant and two others, and T-Mobile/MetroPCS records pertaining to a telephone number belonging to defendant. Defendant filed a motion pursuant to CalECPA and the Fourth Amendment to void the warrants and suppress the evidence, which the trial court denied following an evidentiary hearing. Defendant was convicted of second degree murder…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Ramirez (2023) 98 Cal.App.5th 175
Case #: H049957
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 12/22/2023

Even assuming the compelled use of defendant’s fingerprint to unlock his cell phone constitutes a “search” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, there was no Fourth Amendment violation because use of defendant’s fingerprint was authorized by the search warrants. Jane Doe 1’s mother reported that defendant had taken inappropriate pictures of Jane Doe 1 on his phone. After obtaining electronic communications search warrants to search defendant’s phone, an officer went to the jail and used defendant’s fingerprint to unlock the phone and view its contents. When the phone locked and officers were unable to open it, they obtained another…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Wadleigh (2023) 93 Cal.App.5th 531
Case #: A165017
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 07/12/2023
Subsequent History: Opn. modified 7/27/2023

A warrant application in a suspected child pornography case should include the actual images purporting to establish probable cause, at least in cases where a determination that the images constitute prohibited material requires subjective judgment. Adobe reported a “Cypbertip” that 23 images of suspected child pornography had been uploaded to an Adobe account. The officer who investigated the tip prepared a search warrant application that described, but did not include, four images that he believed depicted sexual conduct. The officer later testified that he was trained not to include images of suspected child pornography in warrant applications. A magistrate authorized…

View Full Summary
Name: Price v. Superior Court (Riverside) (2023) 93 Cal.App.5th 13
Case #: E078954
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 07/03/2023

Geofence warrant satisfied the probable cause and particularity requirements of the Fourth Amendment and was not overbroad. Victim J.R. was shot and killed in the front porch area of his home. Defendant was identified as a suspect in the shooting based on cellular location data and identifying information returned pursuant to a geofence warrant to Google. Defendant’s motion to quash, traverse, and suppress evidence obtained pursuant to the geofence warrant was denied. He was held to answer for murder and other charges. After his renewed suppression motion was denied, defendant petitioned for writ relief. Held: Petition denied. Defendant argued there…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Meza (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 520
Case #: B318310
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 7
Opinion Date: 04/13/2023

Geofence search warrant was constitutionally overbroad where law enforcement failed to sufficiently narrow the search parameters to avoid unnecessary infringement on the privacy rights of uninvolved third parties. A geofence warrant is an official request by law enforcement to access device location data gathered by large tech companies like Google. This data is typically anonymized, but it can be used in conjunction with other investigative techniques to tie devices to specific users. Here, defendants were identified as suspects in a murder investigation after a geofence search warrant directed to Google revealed that cell phones connected to defendants were in several…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Fish
Case #: B290108
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 11/27/2018

Where a valid search warrant authorizes a blood draw from a defendant arrested for DUI, and the circumstances of the blood draw are typical and routine, the defendant bears the burden of showing the blood was not drawn in a "reasonable manner." Fish was arrested for driving under the influence (DUI). His blood was drawn at a hospital pursuant to a valid search warrant. The trial court granted Fish's motion to suppress the results of the blood test because the prosecution failed to prove the blood was drawn in a reasonable manner. The prosecution appealed to the appellate…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Williams
Case #: B275226
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 8
Opinion Date: 09/08/2017

Trial court properly denied motion to suppress evidence where discovery of dogs in distress fell under exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement. An officer followed an escaped horse to defendants' residence, where he heard dogs barking and smelled excessive fecal matter. After securing the horse in a trailer, police looked through a window in the garage door and saw dogs in unhealthful conditions, and a device for training fighting dogs. In the backyard, they saw pitbulls in makeshift kennels. Photographs of the property were later used to obtain a search warrant. Defendants ultimately pleaded…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Nguyen
Case #: H042795
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 06/07/2017

Trial court properly suppressed evidence obtained during search because defendant's residence was outside the scope of the warrant, police did not act in good faith reliance on the warrant, and police had no probable cause to search. Police obtained a search warrant based on probable cause that a computer located at an address in San Jose was being used to share child pornography online. The warrant included the main residence, garages, and outbuildings. While searching the main residence, police discovered that Nguyen was living in a separate residence located behind the house. They searched his residence and found child pornography…

View Full Summary
Name: United States v. Perkins
Case #: 15-30035
Court: US Court of Appeals
District 9 Cir
Opinion Date: 03/13/2017

Reckless omission of material facts from search warrant application mandates reversal of federal receipt of child pornography conviction. After his motion to suppress evidence was denied, Perkins entered a guilty plea to receipt of child pornography. On his first appeal the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's denial of Perkins' Franks hearing (Franks v. Delaware (1978) 438 U.S. 154) and remanded for further hearing. The district court concluded the affiant did not intentionally or recklessly omit material information from the warrant application and again denied the suppression motion. Perkins appealed. Held: Reversed. To prevail on a Franks challenge to a…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Lee
Case #: B255008
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 8
Opinion Date: 11/13/2015

Trial court erred in quashing search warrant where defendant failed to make a substantial preliminary showing that material information in the affidavit in support of the warrant was deliberately or recklessly omitted. Lee was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245); a great bodily injury enhancement was found true (Pen. Code, § 12022.7). He was sentenced to seven years in prison. Prior to trial, Lee filed a motion to quash the search warrant for his home ("Franks" hearing, see Franks v. Delaware (1978) 438 U.S. 154)). During the search, police learned the name of a witness…

View Full Summary