Police could rely on a person’s burglary in progress call even when it turned out she was wrong or even an officious interloper

Police responding to a burglary-in-progress call could rely on representation of a woman who claimed to be a burglary victim at a vacant house she claimed to own by her standing out front and asking officers to enter to look for the burglar. There was an open rear door. Inside, they found the defendant sitting at a computer, and a marijuana grow operation. He claimed to be the resident. Reliance on the purported victim was reasonable, and the entry was not suppressed. State v. McKinley, 2007 Ohio 3705, 2007 Ohio App. LEXIS 3378 (2d Dist. July 20, 2007). (Comment: This is a tough case, and it almost seems to take Illinois v. Rodriguez to its limit. Is this what happens when a snoopy neighbor decides to rat out her pot smoking neighbor? By claiming burglary?)

A valid traffic stop of a van led the officer to notice movement in the back of the van, so he told those who were there to show themselves, and a shotgun case was visible. The officer asked if there were any guns in the car, and the defendant said there was, and he validly consented to a search. State v. Alcorn, 2007 Ohio 3693, 2007 Ohio App. LEXIS 3362 (2d Dist. July 20, 2007).*

Defendant lacked standing to challenge the search of his co-defendant’s pockets that produced 440 grams of meth. He sought to make standing by complaining about the police prolonging the stop, but the court held that the stop was not prolonged [as if that would make a difference]. Martinez v. State, 236 S.W.3d 361 (Tex. App. — Ft. Worth 2007).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.