Posts Tagged ‘warrantless search’
Detention At Arrest Location For 6 Minutes Held Reasonable!
State v. Antoine D. Watts (A-21-14) (074556) Argued September 17, 2015 — Decided December 2, 2015 Submitted by New Jersey Criminal Defense Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark New Jersey Supreme Court decision: The issue in this case is whether the second search of a defendant for 6 minutes after he was initially detained on a street corner…
Read MoreState v. Witt Part II: The Confusion of Exigency
Submitted by New Jersey Criminal Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. A previous blog presented the facts of State v. Witt and explained that up until now Pena-Flores was the governing case in New Jersey when it came to warrantless vehicle searches. Under that case a police officer must meet three requirements to search a vehicle without a…
Read MoreLarge Gap Between Reasonable Suspicion and Probable Cause
Submitted by New Jersey Drug Crime Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark State v. Lewis, decided by the Appellate Division, on June 25th, is an appeal of a conviction partially based on a motion to suppress evidence that defendant argues was improperly denied by the trial court. The relevant facts are that the defendant was spotted by an…
Read MoreDo Not Disturb: SCOTUS Holds Warrantless Searches of Hotel Guest Records Unconstitutional
Submitted by New Jersey Criminal Attorney, Jeffrey Hark On June 22, 2015 the U.S. Supreme Court decided City of Los Angeles, California v. Patel et al., a case that pitted Fourth Amendment rights against a city’s interest in reducing crime. The controversy arose out of L.A. Municipal Code Section 41.49(3)(a) which requires hotel operators to…
Read MoreEmergency Circumstacnes: Exigency in State v. Eckel,
Submitted by New Jersey DWI Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark Our court has outlined exigency in See State v. Eckel, 185 N.J. 523. Exigency has been defined as circumstances which provide the officer with the heightened concern for his safety or the destruction of evidence. Id. at 534. The U.S Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Missouri v.…
Read MoreCell Phones: Password Protected And Now Warrant Protected
Major Privacy Ruling – Cell Phones and Unreasonable Search Submitted by New Jersey Criminal Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark. News Flash:—— United States v. Wurie and Riley v. California. The U.S. Supreme Court decided two landmark cases on June 25, 2014 for anyone who gets arrested with a cell phone on them. One case arose out of…
Read MoreExigency and Warrantless Search | State of New Jersey vs. Witt
Submitted by New Jersey Criminal Lawyer, Jeffrey Hark One of the requirements for conducting a warrantless search is exigency, or to use another word, urgency. The leading case concerning exigency is State v. Pena-Flores in which the Jersey Supreme Court claimed that it was just reaffirming three decades of New Jersey common law which all…
Read MoreState of New Jersey vs Michael Cushing | Consent and Warrantless Search
Download the PDF here or visit the New Jersey Courts website RECORD IMPOUNDED NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-0856-12T1 STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. MICHAEL CUSHING, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________________________________________ Argued October 8, 2013 – Decided Before Judges Messano, Hayden and Rothstadt.…
Read More