AI workflows for revenue teams
Placeholder house ad for Conservus.ai. Swap with final creative when brand assets are ready.
Partner with Conservus.aiLatest Cases & Updates
Rights explainers, case coverage, and defense-oriented reporting.
Chatrie v. United States Could End Geofence Warrants: Why the Supreme Court Is About to Decide If Police Can Dragnet Everyone Near a Crime Scene
The Supreme Court will rule by late June 2026 on whether police can use geofence warrants to sweep up every phone near a crime scene. Here is what Chatrie v. United States means for your Fourth Amendment rights.
Case v. Montana Hands Police a New Way Into Your Home Without a Warrant or Probable Cause
On January 14, 2026, a unanimous Supreme Court ruled that police can enter a home without a warrant under the emergency-aid exception based only on an objectively reasonable belief that someone inside is seriously hurt or in danger. Probable cause is not required. Here is what the decision says, why defense lawyers fear it for DUI and welfare-check cases, and how to challenge an entry dressed up as a rescue.
Culley v. Marshall Said No Prompt Hearing Required. State Legislatures Are Saying Otherwise in 2026.
After the Supreme Court ruled in Culley v. Marshall that no prompt post-seizure hearing is constitutionally required, Washington, Colorado, Oklahoma, and other states moved to guarantee one anyway. Here is what the new laws mean for defense lawyers and owners.
Counterman's Recklessness Standard Is Killing Social Media 'True Threat' Prosecutions: Why Posts Defendants Never Read Their Audience Aren't Crimes
After Counterman v. Colorado, prosecutors must prove a defendant consciously disregarded the risk a post would read as a threat. On broadcast platforms, that proof is collapsing.
Smith v. Arizona Is Killing DUI Blood Tests: Why Surrogate Lab Analyst Testimony Is Getting Suppressed in 2026
The Supreme Court's 2024 ruling in Smith v. Arizona closed a Confrontation Clause loophole that prosecutors had used for over a decade to introduce blood-alcohol results without the analyst who ran the test. Two years on, the fallout is reshaping DUI suppression practice.
Lange v. California Is Finally Killing Warrantless Home Entry for DUI: Why Misdemeanor Hot-Pursuit Suppressions Are Surging in 2026
Five years after the Supreme Court rejected categorical hot-pursuit entry for misdemeanors, state high courts are finally applying the rule. Pennsylvania's 2025 Hunte decision shows where DUI suppression motions are winning, and how bodycam timestamps have become the decisive evidence.
Drug-Induced Homicide Charges Are Exploding in 2026: Why Sharing a Single Fentanyl Pill Now Triggers a Murder Indictment
Prosecutors across the country are increasingly using drug-induced homicide and 'death by distribution' statutes to charge friends, partners, and co-users who handed over a single fentanyl pill. Here is how the laws work, why federal causation doctrine is the central battleground, and what defendants need to know.
Snyder v. United States Two Years In: Why Federal § 666 Bribery Cases Against State and Local Officials Are Collapsing
Two years after the Supreme Court's 6-3 Snyder decision, district courts are vacating § 666 bribery counts and forcing DOJ to rebuild public-corruption cases. Here is what changed, why the ComEd Four got a partial retrial, and what defendants charged under federal bribery laws should be filing in the next 30 to 90 days.
Rahimi One Year Later: How Domestic Violence Gun Surrender Orders Are Still Getting Reversed on Procedural Grounds
One year after the Supreme Court upheld the federal ban on gun possession for people under domestic violence protective orders, defense lawyers are still winning as-applied challenges. The reason: most state protective-order forms never memorialize the findings Rahimi actually required.
Field Sobriety Tests Were Never Validated for Cannabis: Why DRE Officer Testimony Is Getting Tossed in 2026
The 12-step Drug Recognition Expert protocol was built for poly-drug roadside triage in the 1970s and 80s and never validated against a cannabis impairment threshold. NHTSA admits it in writing. State v. Moore, Williams v. State, and the April 2026 DOJ rescheduling order give the defense bar a deep Rule 702 playbook for attacking cannabis DUI cases in 2026.
Clean Slate Goes Automatic in 2026: How Felony Records Are Getting Sealed Without Anyone Filing a Petition
Fourteen states and DC now seal eligible criminal records without a petition. Here is how the automation works, what it misses, and why your old plea language still controls the outcome.
Barrett v. United States Was Not About Felon-in-Possession: The Real Status of § 922(g)(1) After January 2026
Many federal defenders heard that Barrett v. United States would force the Supreme Court to decide felon-in-possession challenges by June 2026. That is not what Barrett decided. Here is the actual landscape for § 922(g)(1) cases.
AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Material Is Now Being Charged Federally: Why the First Conviction Will Set Precedent
The Justice Department has begun prosecuting entirely AI-generated child sexual abuse material under a hybrid charging theory that pairs 18 U.S.C. 2256 with the PROTECT Act's obscenity statute. The first federal conviction will likely set the constitutional baseline for every case that follows.
Roadside Cannabis Testing Has No Legal Limit: Why DUI-D Cases Are Falling Apart After the Schedule III Move
After the DEA's April 2026 rescheduling of FDA-approved and state-licensed medical marijuana to Schedule III, defense lawyers are dismantling DUI-drug prosecutions built on per se nanogram thresholds, roadside oral-fluid screeners, and DRE testimony that cannot distinguish week-old metabolites from active impairment.
Deepfake Evidence in Criminal Court: What Defense Lawyers Are Filing Before Federal Rule 901(c) Takes Effect
The amended Federal Rule of Evidence 901(c) is not yet in force, and the earliest possible effective date is December 1, 2027. Defense lawyers are not waiting. Here is what they are filing now under existing Rules 901, 702, and 403, and how the pending rulemaking is already shifting the gatekeeping standard.
Luigi Mangione's Federal Death Penalty Case: Why a Manhattan Jury Will Never Vote on Execution
A January 30, 2026 ruling by Judge Margaret Garnett and the Justice Department's decision not to appeal mean a Manhattan federal jury will never deliberate on whether Luigi Mangione lives or dies. The capital count fell on the elements, not the evidence.
Marijuana Just Moved to Schedule III. Here Is Why It Will Not Erase a Single Conviction or Drop a Single Charge
The April 2026 order moving FDA-approved and state-licensed medical marijuana to Schedule III is narrow and forward-looking. It does not expunge convictions, drop pending charges, or lower the quantity-based mandatory minimums in federal trafficking law.
United States v. Hemani: Why the Justices Sound Ready to Strike the Gun Ban on Marijuana Users
The Supreme Court heard United States v. Hemani on March 2, 2026, and a majority of justices sounded skeptical of the federal law that bars drug users from owning firearms. Here is what 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(3) actually prohibits, how the case reached the Court, and what a ruling could mean for defendants charged with possessing a gun while using a controlled substance.
After VanDerStok: How Ghost Gun Defenses Are Still Winning Motions in Federal Court
The Supreme Court upheld the ATF's ghost gun rule, but only against a facial challenge. The real federal fight has moved to scienter, as-applied scope, and suppression, and defenders are winning motions on every front.
When the Plea Deal Triggers Deportation: How Noncitizen Defendants Are Pulling Guilty Pleas Under Padilla in 2026
A 2025-2026 enforcement surge is sending noncitizen defendants back to court to vacate old guilty pleas under Padilla v. Kentucky. Here is how the doctrine works, which procedural vehicles are winning, and what the Supreme Court's Blanche v. Lau ruling could change.
Mullen v. Giordano: How a Fired Cop's First Amendment Win Could Help Protesters Beat Disorderly Conduct and Assault Charges
A federal judge in Arizona just found that an off-duty Phoenix sergeant fired after showing up masked and armed at a high school anti-ICE walkout had a strong First Amendment case. The same private-citizen and recording-as-speech logic cuts hard in favor of protesters facing disorderly conduct and assault charges.
Virginia's New 'Assault Firearm' Law: Misdemeanor Charges, a Three-Year Gun Ban, and What Owners Should Do Before July 1
Virginia's HB217/SB749 takes effect July 1, 2026. Contrary to widely circulated claims, the new ban creates Class 1 misdemeanor exposure plus a three-year firearm prohibition, not felony charges. Here is what is actually criminalized, what is grandfathered, and how the pending Bruen-based litigation could reshape enforcement.
Vindictive Prosecution Just Killed the Abrego García Case: How Federal Defenders Are Using the Doctrine to Get Indictments Dismissed in 2026
A Tennessee federal judge dismissed the human-smuggling indictment against Kilmar Abrego García on May 22, 2026, finding the Government failed to rebut a presumption of vindictive prosecution. Here is how defense lawyers can replicate the template.
37 Days in Jail for a Meme: How a $835,000 Settlement Shows First Amendment Retaliation Claims Can Pay
Larry Bushart spent 37 days in a Tennessee jail on a $2 million bond after posting a Trump meme on Facebook. On May 20, 2026, Perry County paid him $835,000 to settle his Section 1983 lawsuit. Here is how plaintiffs are turning wrongful speech arrests into six-figure payouts.
The Shadow Docket Is Quietly Rewriting Criminal Procedure: Why Defense Lawyers Are Now Tracking Emergency Orders
Unsigned Supreme Court emergency orders are now functioning as de facto precedent on stays of execution, habeas timing, and Fourth Amendment suppression. Defense lawyers are tracking the docket nightly, and Congress has filed two waves of reform bills.
Alex Murdaugh Is Suing the Court Clerk in Federal Court: How Jury Tampering Claims Become a Path to a New Trial
South Carolina's Supreme Court already vacated Alex Murdaugh's murder convictions over a court clerk's jury interference. Days later he sued her in federal court. Here is how a jury-tampering claim actually unwinds a conviction, and why the civil suit is a separate track.
A Hung Jury Is Not an Acquittal: After Another Weinstein Mistrial, Can New York Put Him on Trial a Third Time?
A Manhattan jury deadlocked again on the Jessica Mann rape count against Harvey Weinstein, ending in a mistrial. Here is why a hung jury is constitutionally different from an acquittal, and what it means for whether New York can try the count yet again.
A Federal Jury Would Not Convict: Why Assault-on-a-Federal-Officer Cases From Protests Keep Ending in Mistrials
A Portland jury deadlocked over a felony assault-on-a-federal-officer charge. It is part of a pattern. Here is what 18 U.S.C. § 111 requires, what a hung jury means, and why a retrial does not violate double jeopardy.
Falsely Accused of Assault and Awarded $500,000: How Targets of False Police Reports Are Winning Damages
A New York jury found two people lied to a court officer to get an attorney arrested. An appeals court upheld their liability for defamation, false arrest, and malicious prosecution while cutting the damages to a net $500,000. Here is how targets of fabricated police reports turn a dismissed charge into a civil claim.
Over the Legal Limit but Not Automatically Guilty of Homicide: Why Prosecutors Have to Prove the DUI Caused the Death
A drunk driving conviction and a vehicular homicide conviction are not the same case. In Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Michigan, prosecutors have to separately prove that the impaired driving actually caused the death, and that causation gap is where these cases are won and lost.
Legally Drunk but Acquitted: Why DUI Vehicular Homicide Cases Are Won on Causation, Not the Breath Test
In Pennsylvania, a driver can be over the legal limit and still avoid a homicide by vehicle while DUI conviction. Here is why these cases turn on causation, not the breath test, and what the 2026 Commonwealth v. Kling decision changed.
Prosecutor Disqualification Is the New Defense Move: Why the Santa Clara DA Removal Just Opened a Playbook for Every Politically Charged Case
On May 7, 2026, a Santa Clara judge threw the entire DA's office off a retrial of five Stanford protesters after finding the prosecution had been wired into a campaign fundraising page. Here is the legal mechanism, the discovery it pries loose, and how defense lawyers are turning recusal motions into a weapon in politically charged cases.
The Government's Fourth Amendment Double Standard: How New Suppression Motions Are Exploiting the Asymmetry in 2026
A May 2026 SCOTUSblog essay argues the government uses one Fourth Amendment for officers and another for defendants. Defense lawyers are now writing that asymmetry directly into suppression motions across DUI, drug, and digital-search cases.
Federal Court Blocks Arizona AG's Criminal Case Against Kalshi: Why Federal Preemption Is Becoming the White Collar Defense Move of 2026
A May 5, 2026 federal injunction blocking Arizona's criminal case against Kalshi just handed white collar defendants a portable preemption playbook against state AG charges in CFTC, SEC, and federally chartered industries.
18 USC 119 Is the New Federal Speech Crime: Why a Guilty Plea for Doxxing a Supreme Court Justice Signals a Wider Prosecution Wave
A North Carolina man's guilty plea to posting a Supreme Court justice's home address tests a 2008 federal statute now central to online speech cases. What 18 U.S.C. § 119 actually criminalizes, how the First Amendment fight will run, and what defense lawyers need to know.
Hallucinated Citations and $5K Sanctions: Why Criminal Defense Lawyers Using AI Are One Brief Away From Disbarment in 2026
A federal judge's May 9, 2026 sanctions order in Coomer v. Lindell underscores how AI-generated fake citations are now triggering five-figure penalties, bar discipline, and dismissed criminal cases. For defenders, the verification duty is no longer optional.
Nitrogen Hypoxia Reaches the Supreme Court: Why Capital Defenders Think the Eighth Amendment Wall May Finally Hold
After Anthony Boyd's 38-minute October 2025 nitrogen execution in Alabama, capital defenders are positioning Jeffrey Lee's June 11, 2026 case as the next Supreme Court vehicle to test the protocol under Glossip v. Gross.
Rahimi's Aftermath: Why Federal Domestic Violence Gun Prosecutions Are Splitting Circuits in 2026
Eighteen months after the Supreme Court upheld the federal DV protective-order gun ban, the harder questions about misdemeanor convictions, indictments, and qualifying orders are dividing federal courts. The Fourth Circuit's January 2026 Jacobs decision is the pivot.
Per Se THC Limits Are Failing as Junk Science: How Defenders Are Beating Marijuana DUI Cases in 2026
Six states still convict drivers on a blood THC number alone, but federal regulators, peer-reviewed pharmacology, and a 2025 wave of legislative reform now agree the science does not support it. Here is how defense lawyers are dismantling per se cannabis DUI cases.
Fentanyl Drug-Induced Homicide Prosecutions Are Charging Users as Murderers: Why Defense Lawyers Are Beating Causation in 2026
Drug-induced homicide prosecutions have surged in the fentanyl era, with 31 states and DC now authorizing some form of homicide charge for fatal overdoses. Defense lawyers in 2026 are increasingly winning these cases by attacking causation under Burrage v. United States, where mixed-drug toxicology routinely defeats but-for proof.