N.D.Cal.: Def’s admission he lived in place he was found justified parole search of place

All things considered, defendant consented to a search of the house. The fact the consent form was signed after the entry is of minimal value and couldn’t cure an illegal entry anyway. The search is also justified as a parole search. While defendant didn’t list that address with the parole department, he and his cotenant said that it was where he lived. United States v. Johnson, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4550 (N.D. Cal. January 14, 2015).

Officers had an erroneous belief defendant was in a hotel room when they entered with an arrest warrant for him using hotel housekeeping to knock, and, getting no answer, unlock the door. (They saw movement through a window near his door, but it turned out it was the adjoining room.) They found the room empty and a shotgun. When defendant arrived at the hotel, they saw shotgun shells in plain view in the front seat of his van. The shotgun is suppressed, but the shells are not. United States v. McIntosh, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180318 (N.D. Ga. December 17, 2014).*

Admission of 4-5 beers and smell of alcohol in the car after stop for driving left of center was reasonable suspicion for a FST. State v. Mencini, 2015-Ohio-89, 2015 Ohio App. LEXIS 75 (9th Dist. January 14, 2015).*

This entry was posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Consent, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.