Search Warrant: No Slanted Affidavits
with Devallis Rutledge, Special Counsel, Los Angeles CO District Attorney's Office
Officers face liability for search and arrest based on affidavit that contained
false statements and material omissions, to manipulate magistrate’s PC
determination in internet child-porn case. Case cited: Chism v. Washington State
Patrol (9th Cir. 2011) DJDAR 13011. (6:31)

Vehicle Search Exception Requires Probable Cause
with Jeff Rubin, Deputy District Attorney, Alameda County, CA
Just because there is probable cause to arrest a passenger in a vehicle does
not mean there is probable cause to search the vehicle for evidence of a crime.
Thus, a search of a vehicle for identification of a teenage passenger who was
arrested for providing false information to the police was invalid where there
was not probable cause to believe such identification would be found inside the
car. Case cited: U.S. v. Rogers (9th Cir. 2011) 656 F.3d 1023. (10:49)

Search Warrants: Computer Images
with Daniel McNerney, Superior Court Judge, Orange County, CA
Discusses the sufficiency of probable cause to issue a search warrant for a
computer. Cases cited: U.S. v. Krupa (2011) DAR 2092; U.S. v. Battershell
(2006) 457 F.3d 1048; U.S. v. Hill (2006) 459 F.3d 966. (8:14)

Searching Cellphone in Car Incident to Drug Arrest
with Jeff Rubin, Deputy District Attorney, Alameda County, CA
An officer properly searched a cell phone found inside the passenger
compartment of a car after the driver was arrested for being under the influence
of drugs because there was reason to believe that evidence of that crime (such
as paraphernalia or drugs) might be located in the passenger compartment.
It did not matter whether there was also reason to believe the phone itself
might contain evidence of the crime but, in fact, there was reason to believe
such evidence (i.e., messages relating to the purchase or use of drugs and/
or evidence of what type of drug was being used) would be located in the
phone. Finally, the search of the phone could not be justified as an inventory
search because there was no evidence of a policy governing the search of closed
containers such as cell phones. Case cited: People v. Nottoli (2011) 199 Cal.
App.4th 531. (11:51)

Search of Jail Lockers
with William W. Bedsworth, Appellate Court Justice, State of California
Brian Boulter was prosecuted for drug possession based on drugs he stashed
in a visitor’s locker at the Men’s Central Jail in Los Angeles. Before visiting an
inmate, Boulter stored his belongings in a locker provided by the jail 41 feet
from the jail entrance. The lockers had keys. When Boulter was found with a
camera inside the jail, deputies went outside and searched the locker, finding
the drugs. The court held there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a
jail visitor’s locker– even if keys are provided. Justice Bedsworth explains this
important case for jail administration. Case cited: People v. Boulter (2011)
DJDAR 14802 (September 30, 2011). (3:45)

DNA Testing of Saliva Left on PAS Mouthpiece
with Jeff Rubin, Deputy District Attorney, Alameda County, CA
A suspect who consents to taking a PAS test has no legitimate expectation
of privacy in the saliva left on the mouthpiece used during the test where
the mouthpiece is ordinarily discarded and the suspect does not wipe the
mouthpiece off after blowing into the PAS device. Thus, any subsequent testing
of the mouthpiece for DNA evidence will not be deemed a search for Fourth
Amendment purposes. Case cited: People v. Thomas 2011 DJDAR 15833 [2011
WL 5110251] (6:42)