The CI had been working with the drug officers for four months, and his significant information had been significantly corroborated. He also accurately predicted that $400,000 would be packaged and shipped by defendant. That was probable cause. United States v. Norton, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69177 (N.D. Ind. April 28, 2016).*
Defendant was stopped because the paper tag was in the back window. On closer inspection, it was out of date, and that justified continuing the stop. Clay v. State, 2016 WY 55, 2016 Wyo. LEXIS 59 (May 27, 2016).*
Officers executing an arrest warrant for weapons charges had reasonable suspicion for a protective sweep based on sounds from the basement and somebody peeking through the blinds. United States v. Alatorre, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69171 (D.Neb. May 26, 2016).
Officers surveilling a grow operation had information that an Asian male was coming and going but only staying a short time. Search warrants had been issued for other locations. When defendant was seen coming to one suspected grow, that was reasonable suspicion. United States v. Han, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67265 (D.Nev. Mar. 7, 2016),* adopted 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67262 (D. Nev. May 23, 2016).*
When the defendant doesn’t controvert the material facts in the government’s response to his motion to suppress, a hearing isn’t required because all the court has is to apply the law to the facts. United States v. Sledge, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68499 (S.D.Ala. May 25, 2016).
Sufficient nexus was shown between the arrest of a child pornographer in the Netherlands and search of his computer along with his admissions that he had traveled to defendant’s home about child pornography in Georgia and exchanged child porn. United States v. Nichols, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69230 (N.D.Ga. April 29, 2016).*
The fact officers could have done more to validate their suspicions about a Facebook picture and who the child was and defendant and child pornography allegedly involving the same child, it isn’t constitutionally required if probable cause exists. United States v. Nichols, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68987 (N.D. Ga. May 26, 2016):
Where defendant was stopped because he avoided a checkpoint, the constitutionality of the checkpoint isn’t relevant to the appeal because there was no stop. An officer pursued and found the car parked with the lights off. Coming up to the window, the officer could smell alcohol on the driver. This “stop” was with reasonable suspicion. State v. Williams, 2016 S.C. App. LEXIS 50 (May 25, 2016).
Defendant’s post-conviction petition is denied. He argued that defense counsel was ineffective for not challenging the search of his duffle bag during the search of a house by consent when he was an overnight guest. The merits don’t even have to be decided. The amount of drugs in the duffle bag was small compared to the wealth of other drugs defendant was responsible for, and, even if a motion to suppress was successful, defendant’s guideline range wouldn’t change. Therefore, he wasn’t prejudiced by defense counsel’s failure to do so, even if the argument was valid. United States v. Patterson, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178120 (E.D.Ky. Nov. 2, 2015):
Defendant was suspected of making a fraudulent claim in the BP oil spill litigation claiming repairs on a boat. The government gathered information from others that strongly suggested that the boat was neither damaged nor repaired. The government finally applied for a search warrant two years after the claim was made. Defendant’s staleness argument fails. The condition of the boat now would show whether it had been repaired or not, and it had been seen in defendant’s driveway on a trailer all that time. The search warrant could be relied upon in good faith, so the court does not even need to consider probable cause [which there certainly appeared to be]. United States v. Anny, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67066 (M.D.La. May 23, 2016):