Category Archives: Standards of review

ND: Video supports trial court’s finding of no consent to blood test

The video of defendant’s stop supports the trial court’s finding of lack of consent, and it’s affirmed. “The district court’s decision to suppress the results of the blood test was based upon a finding Hawkins did not voluntarily consent to … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Standards of review | Comments Off

CT: When two grounds are found to support the search, def on appeal has to challenge both

Defendant’s claim that the officers did not follow administrative regulations on conducting his parole search was moot where the trial court also found defendant consented to the search and he didn’t challenge consent. State v. Holley, 2017 Conn. App. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Standards of review | Comments Off

GA: Std of review: If video clear, it controls on its facts and gets de novo review

Defendant was stopped for driving a motorcycle without a helmet, and alcohol was on his breath. The objective facts from the video show the FST and breath test were consensual. “And, where, as here, the controlling facts are undisputed because … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Consent, Standards of review | Comments Off

M.D.Pa.: Def kept talking about her husband’s drug activities after ticket issued; that was a consensual extension of the stop

An unlit license plate light was enough for a stop. “Because Defendant had already been issued a traffic citation and then proceeded to initiate further conversation with Officer Monte about her husband’s drug-related activities, the court finds that, under the … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Standards of review | Comments Off

D.Conn.: SW for drugs in house supported plain view of gun under mattress

There was evidence linking defendant’s alleged drug offenses to his home, so the warrant for his home was justified. A drug search is intensive, and the gun found under a mattress was in plain view. United States v. Reyes, 2017 … Continue reading

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Scope of search, Standards of review | Comments Off

ID: “Right result-wrong theory” will not be applied to relieve the state of defaulting an argument in support of search

“Right result-wrong theory” will not be applied to relieve the state of failing to make an argument to support the search in the trial court. The state defaulted the argument it advances on appeal. State v. Garcia-Rodriguez, 2017 Ida. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Standards of review | Comments Off

NH: After reversal on bad search, state free to argue alternative grounds

After the defendant got his conviction reversed on appeal for an unreasonable search, the state was free to make an alternative argument to sustain the search, and here it was independent source and inevitable discovery, which the court finds. Law … Continue reading

Posted in Standards of review | Comments Off

OK: Def counsel not constitutionally required to be notified of DNA SW after prosecution began

A search warrant was obtained for defendant’s DNA after he was represented. The affidavit showed probable cause, and there was no requirement to advise defense counsel of the search warrant before execution. Frederick v. State, 2017 OK CR 12, 2017 … Continue reading

Posted in DNA, Standards of review, Warrant execution | Comments Off

OH6: Merely being “associated” with a vehicle doesn’t confer standing

“In his motion to suppress, he asserted only that he was ‘associated’ with the truck. We find an ‘association’ with the vehicle gives no greater rights than a mere passenger. Therefore, we agree with the state that appellant could not … Continue reading

Posted in Standards of review, Standing | Comments Off

WaPo: Is voluntariness of consent to search or seize a question of fact, law or both?

WaPo: Is voluntariness of consent to search or seize a question of fact, law or both? by Orin Kerr:

Posted in Consent, Standards of review | Comments Off