Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #N
Most recents (24)
A significant crim law case, Dubin v. US, is out, taking a narrow view of the Aggravated Identity Theft statute, 18 U.S.C. 1028A. Statute is limited to what is ordinarily considered identity theft; ID misuse has to be "at the crux" of the crime.
supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf… #N
supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf… #N
Opinion per Sotomayor, unanimous as to result, with 8 Justices joining majority opinion. Gorsuch concurs in the judgment, concluding the statute is vague and that the Court's attempt to narrow it doesn't end the vagueness.
My pre-argument take on Dubin was here.
reason.com/volokh/2023/02…
reason.com/volokh/2023/02…
Officer watches video w/image below, in which suspect brings object into home, & gets warrant to search "based on my training and experience as a police officer" that object is a gun.
Judge: Um, that's a bouquet of flowers. Motion to suppress granted.
drive.google.com/file/d/13bCndn… #N
Judge: Um, that's a bouquet of flowers. Motion to suppress granted.
drive.google.com/file/d/13bCndn… #N
@Anna_Lvovsky To be clear, the image was not included in the warrant application; only the officer's description was. Judge Brown then granted the motion to suppress under Franks v. Delaware, for recklessly misrepresenting what was visible in the video.
From the opinion:
From the opinion:
BUILDING BLOCKS OF EXCEL FUNCTIONS
As a newbie in Data Analysis📊 that is starting out with Excel, it's is important to not just know Excel Functions but understand the building blocks of an Excel Function.
A Thread🧵
As a newbie in Data Analysis📊 that is starting out with Excel, it's is important to not just know Excel Functions but understand the building blocks of an Excel Function.
A Thread🧵
What is a Function?
A function is a predefined formula that performs calculations using specific values in a particular order.
A function is a predefined formula that performs calculations using specific values in a particular order.
There are 3 parts of an Excel Function
1. "=" : Equals sign
Every Excel formula from basic to complex must start with the "Equals" system. It simply tells Excel that this is a formula, and it should evaluate it.
1. "=" : Equals sign
Every Excel formula from basic to complex must start with the "Equals" system. It simply tells Excel that this is a formula, and it should evaluate it.
Suspect, stopped by an officer in front of his mom's house, tosses his jacket over a fence on to his mom's property. Officer later grabs jacket and finds gun in pocket. Divided 5th Circuit: This violated the 4A, as suspect did not abandon the jacket.
ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/2… #N
ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/2… #N
Judge Ho, dissenting: The suspect had abandoned his jacket.
Notably, the majority opinion by Elrod looks for a distinct Jones/trespass test for abandonment, arguing that there was a common law abandonment test for property.
I have two thoughts on this.
I have two thoughts on this.
Recently filed CA9 appeal asks court to answer whether compelled biometric access is "testimonial" and therefore triggers the 5th Amendment privilege.
US v. Payne, 22-50262.
This one has a clear answer: No.
Thread below.
drive.google.com/file/d/1XU4rER… #N
US v. Payne, 22-50262.
This one has a clear answer: No.
Thread below.
drive.google.com/file/d/1XU4rER… #N
In the case, officers took Payne's hand, "grabbed [his] thumb and unlocked the phone." I read that to mean that they took his thumb and placed in on the biometric reader. Later, the officer asked/ordered him to give the code to not have to use the thumb every time.
As I read the brief, the only 5A issue is whether placing Payne's thumb on the reader was testimonial.
In 2018, the Oregon SCT adopted, under its state constitution, a proposal I made in a 2015 article on how to limit computer searches. Today the Oregon Ct of App addressed an important question of how to implement that proposal: What is use?
Thread. 🧵
cdm17027.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collec… #N
Thread. 🧵
cdm17027.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collec… #N
1st, some background. The general topic here is how should the law limit computer warrant searches. Computers store a vast sea of information. If you apply the physical-world rules, every computer search can be like a general warrant search in practice.
But how do you limit the searches? In my 2015 article, I argued that the best way was through use restrictions on non-responsive information. Allow the broad searches, but don't allow the stuff not described in the warrant to be used.
Article here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
Article here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
Oral argument in the 9th Circuit 2 weeks ago in US v. Bohannon in part on whether Terms of Service waive 4A rights in Internet accounts. (The panel has since remanded for fact-finding on the private search doctrine, according to Fourthamendment,com) #N
Most interesting discussion starts at the 22 min mark, when Judge Eric Miller starts pressing the AUSA on the Terms of Service argument. Does it apply to apartment leases? Can the NSA search? Judge Sanchez joins in at the 26:50 mark, suggesting arg is "in tension" w/ 4A law.
At 28:50, the AUSA tries to distinguish Byrd:, the SCOTUS rental car case.The particular TOS in Byrd weren't about expectations of privacy, while the TOS here are.
CA4: While we can't assume everyone has electronic storage devices, here there was sufficient basis to search for and seize such devices w/ the warrant: This crime involved an e-mailed threat, and most people own cell phones.
🧵
govinfo.gov/content/pkg/US… #N
🧵
govinfo.gov/content/pkg/US… #N
I am not sure I get the reluctance of courts to just assume that people have electronic storage devices. The % of cell phone ownership is extremely high, see below. And as Carpenter said, you can't participate in modern life w/o such devices. pewresearch.org/internet/fact-…
I would think the issue in most of these cases is less whether the person has a device than whether evidence of that particular crime is likely to be on the device.
Around 7:00 am this morning, I also took my vitamin supplements: a woman's multivitamin, vitamin D, and Black Cohosh.
Black Cohosh is in the plant family of species on this planet (a naturally growing herb that has been used for quite some time). It helps your body produce produce estrogen but doesn't take effect as quickly as synthetic estrogen. (About 2 to 3 week buildup in body).
Black Cohosh really helped me with the hot flashes related to menopause,and it still helps, although the hot flashes are not quite as bad anymore. (About nine years of peri-, during, post- menopausal hot flashes. But I have been ill for quite some time). Check with a good doctor.
D.D.C. assumes w/o deciding that Google geofence is a "search," holds that J6 warrant for logged in accounts at capitol from 2pm to 6:30pm on 1/6/21 was sufficiently particular.
A few thoughts below. #N
ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_p…
A few thoughts below. #N
ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_p…
As I understand the opinion, there are two parts: 1st, was the geofence sufficiently narrow that there was PC to think the accounts picked up would be evidence? And here, there was.
2nd, defendant makes a claim that the warrant vested too much discretionary power in the government that gets labeled a claim about particularity. I don't know what that argument has to do with warrant particularity, but in any event, the court rejects the claim.
A person has a reasonable of expectation of privacy in the contents of a password-protected Dropbox account, Wisconsin Court of Appeals holds. It's a closed container for 4th Amendment purposes —remote, but closed. (Yes, definitely right, in my view.) wicourts.gov/ca/opinion/Dis… #N
It's surprising how little caselaw there is on this. That's partly because lawyers for Internet providers generally require a warrant before they'll turn over account contents, and investigators can't practically sue the providers over that if they disagree (it takes too long).
If the providers are requiring a warrant, you end up with a warrant requirement in practice but little or no caselaw on whether it's required. So having caselaw on this is actually pretty useful.
Cal SCT, over dissent of Liu, J., holds that police shining a spotlight on a parked car at night is a factor in whether the driver was seized (whether a reas person in that situation would feel free to leave), but isn't an automatic seizure. courts.ca.gov/opinions/docum… #N
Liu, dissenting, would treat spotlight as imparting a message that you are not free to leave.
Liu's dissent has lots of cites to law review articles on how the Supreme Court has misapplied its own doctrine on seizures — most people wouldn't feel free to leave when the Supreme Court says a reasonable person would. Majority says, well, we are bound by SCOTUS, not articles.
Much focus on Poisson regression (whether for cross section or FE Poisson for panel data) is on its consistency when the conditional mean (almost always assumed to be exponential) is correctly specified. This is its most important feature.
A less well known but very important feature is its relative efficiency in the class of robust estimators -- that is, estimators consistent when only the mean is correct. (This requirement rules out MLEs of lots of models, such as NegBin I and NegBin II.)
The efficiency claims are satisfying. In the random sampling case, Poisson QMLE is efficient in the class of robust estimators if the variance is proportional to the mean. The constant can be less than one or greater than one; it doesn't matter. It doesn't have to equal one!
Notable: D.Ariz reaches a question long speculated about but, to my knowledge, never before reached: If a dog sniff for drugs is not a search under Caballes, does that allow searches for CSAM, too? Held: Yes, no search, Caballes applies.
Thread.
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco… #N
Thread.
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco… #N
I confess I find this case a bit odd. First, procedurally, it's a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 case alleging ineffective assistance for failure to raise a 4A issue. But as best I recall, the 4A claim has been tried elsewhere and hasn't worked, so I don't see how it's in IAC territory.
2nd, substantively, the claim is that Caballes applies to NCMEC opening a file to confirm it's CSAM. But I don't see how that's a Caballes issue. When NCMEC opens a file, it's either CSAM *or it's a private file that isn't CSAM.
Selama pake Excel, kendala yg sering aku alamin pas berkutat sama byk data itu kadang ada
nilai yg masih belum diketahui formatnya.
Untungnya ada fungsi IS yg bisa ngebantu "recheck" nilainya sebelum akua lanjutin formula nya
Aku mau coba tunjukin di sini. Semoga bermanfaat
nilai yg masih belum diketahui formatnya.
Untungnya ada fungsi IS yg bisa ngebantu "recheck" nilainya sebelum akua lanjutin formula nya
Aku mau coba tunjukin di sini. Semoga bermanfaat
1. ISBLANK
Fungsi ini dipake buat meriksa cell nya kosong atau nggak. Kalau kosong, ISBLANK bakal
ngehasilin nilai TRUE dan kalau nggak, hasilnya bakal jadi FALSE.
Syntax Fungsi
=ISBLANK(Value)
Noted : Kalau Sel nya isinya tanda spasi saja, berarti bukan Blank ya
Fungsi ini dipake buat meriksa cell nya kosong atau nggak. Kalau kosong, ISBLANK bakal
ngehasilin nilai TRUE dan kalau nggak, hasilnya bakal jadi FALSE.
Syntax Fungsi
=ISBLANK(Value)
Noted : Kalau Sel nya isinya tanda spasi saja, berarti bukan Blank ya
2. ISFORMULA
Aku sering pakai ini buat ngecek suatu cell itu lagi ada rumusnya atau nggak.
Kalau cell ada
rumus/formula, cell bakal ngasih nilai TRUE meskipun hasil formulanya Error dan nilai FALSE kalau nggak ada formulanya
Syntax Fungsi:
=ISFORMULA(Reference)
Aku sering pakai ini buat ngecek suatu cell itu lagi ada rumusnya atau nggak.
Kalau cell ada
rumus/formula, cell bakal ngasih nilai TRUE meskipun hasil formulanya Error dan nilai FALSE kalau nggak ada formulanya
Syntax Fungsi:
=ISFORMULA(Reference)
I was a Senior Finance Manager at Microsoft from 2019 to 2021.
I built hundreds of complex financial models in Excel that helped close billion-dollar deals.
If you want to use Excel like a PRO, start by learning these 10 things:
I built hundreds of complex financial models in Excel that helped close billion-dollar deals.
If you want to use Excel like a PRO, start by learning these 10 things:
1/ SUMIFS
Use it to add up values that meet one or two criteria.
In English:
SUMIFS(values you want to add, condition 1 range, condition 1)
Ex: Give me the total downloads for each podcast.
Use it to add up values that meet one or two criteria.
In English:
SUMIFS(values you want to add, condition 1 range, condition 1)
Ex: Give me the total downloads for each podcast.
2/ XLOOKUP
Use it to search for a value in a column and return the corresponding value from another column.
In English:
XLOOKUP(value to find, column to look in, what do you want to get, what to do if not found)
Ex: Give me the total downloads on June 19, 2022.
Use it to search for a value in a column and return the corresponding value from another column.
In English:
XLOOKUP(value to find, column to look in, what do you want to get, what to do if not found)
Ex: Give me the total downloads on June 19, 2022.
LIKE A LAW SCHOOL EXAM HYPO: If one officer orders a suspect out of car and opens the door to help him out, and a 2nd officer then peers in via the open door and sees drugs, has a 4A search occurred? Ohio SCT rules, 4-2, that there was no search.. supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0… #N
The majority treats the two officers as separate. The first officer didn't conduct a search because, although he opened the door, he lacked the intent to obtain info. The second officer had the intent, but no act. Treating each separately, no officer committed a search.
The dissent says you can't add a subjective intent test to the 1st officer's act, and that it was objectively a search — and then (if I am reading it correctly) suggests perhaps you should look at the conduct of the officers together, not individually.
When a person consents to a computer search, the government creates an image copy of the computer to search, and the person withdraws consent before the image is searched, the image can't be searched based on consent, Md. Ct. Special Appeals holds.
🧵courts.state.md.us/data/opinions/… #N
🧵courts.state.md.us/data/opinions/… #N
I had a short thread on this then-pending case, and the legal it raised, back in June.
I wrote in 2015 in favor of the same result the Maryland court reached, here.
washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-co…
washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-co…
Lots of new 4A caselaw in lower cts scrutinizing traffic stops length under Rodriguez—scrutiny often aided by police cameras—& this CA11 op by Branch is a good example. Held: no QI, on to jury, on whether getting out of car 4 dog sniff was beyond stop.
media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/f… #N
media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/f… #N
For the 3 or 4 nerds following this closely, am I right the Court takes the issue as being whether the non-mission conduct occurred after when the mission stop did or should have completed, not, as at least some courts appear to me to have concluded...
...whether there was some amount of non-mission stop conduct? Here's the Idaho Supreme Court adopting the latter view in State v. Linze:
caselaw.findlaw.com/id-supreme-cou…
caselaw.findlaw.com/id-supreme-cou…
INTERESTING: The government wants to fly a drone in an investigation. Exactly when using a drone is a 4A search is murky.
Q: Can the govt get an All Writs Act order, rather than a warrant, to judicially bless the drone use?
MJ in EDNC: No.
Thread.
drive.google.com/file/d/1vPpW_m… #N
Q: Can the govt get an All Writs Act order, rather than a warrant, to judicially bless the drone use?
MJ in EDNC: No.
Thread.
drive.google.com/file/d/1vPpW_m… #N
I agree with MJ Numbers's bottom line: You can't use the All Writs Act independently. The whole point of the AWA is to ensure the enforcement of some other judicial order. No other order means no AWA order. So that result is right, I think.
With that said, I don't think MJ Numbers is right to focus on whether or when drone use is a search. It doesn't matter at this stage: It has no impact on whether an AWA order can issue. Either way, the AWA order can't issue.
8th Cir.: It's not inherently a violation of the 4th Am to have the St. Louis system of "wanted" notices, in which one officer flags suspects for arrest by others. But watch out, reliance on "wanted" doesn't insulate you from personal liability.
ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/22/11/2… #N
ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/22/11/2… #N
If this topic rings a bell for regular readers, I had a long thread about the briefs and arguments back in April.
As I understand the opinion, the court is saying that you always judge arrests by probable cause, so having one officer say he has PC (by issuing a "wanted") doesn't fundamentally change that: It's neither always PC, nor never PC.
This is going to be reversed by the CA2, as the law all goes the other way, but Judge Korman holds that executing a warrant at 6am, with guns drawn, after waiting 30 seconds after announcing, is "revolting," violates the 4A, and requires suppression. drive.google.com/file/d/1xLFoy4… #N
Korman ends up coming up with a way that only part of the evidence is suppressed. (Is that to complicate certification under 18 USC 3731? So that there's a plea? Not sure. Maybe I am being too cynical, but this opinion is really something.)
But hey, Roger Stone was sixty-six.
TIRE-CHALKING JURISPRUDENCE UPDATE: CA9 rules 2-1 that tire chalking does not violate the 4A. Assuming it's a search, it falls within the special needs/administrative search exception. (Per Bress, w/ Bumatay dissenting). #N
🛞✏️🧵
cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opin… #N
🛞✏️🧵
cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opin… #N
First, a reminder: This twitter feed is dedicated to satisfying all of your tire-chalking jurisprudence needs. For prior tweets on the latest in tire-chalking and the 4th Amendment, see here: twitter.com/search?q=tire-…
Ok, on to the opinion. The CA9 argues that, even if tire-chalking is a search, it's okay under the special needs/admin search doctrine. A few key sections:
