S.D.Ga.: Def’s own comments about incriminating nature of things in plain view support seizure

Defendant’s own comments about what was in plain view made its incriminating nature immediately apparent. United States v. Arnold, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1071 (S.D. Ga. January 6, 2014).*

Defendant was stopped as he was getting out of a car at an alleged drug house and questioned. He admitted to being on parole and that there was a gun in the car. The question of how the search went down wasn’t properly decided by the district court, so it’s remanded for reconsideration of the consent. United States v. Guzman, 739 F.3d 241 (5th Cir. 2014).*

Defendant’s two purchases of pseudoephedrine as a probable precursor for making methamphetamine was nexus to his house for a search warrant. There was otherwise probable cause. United States v. Smith, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1439 (N.D. W.Va. January 7, 2014).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.