D.Nev.: Other searches in FBI fake internet repair entry case suppressed

In the Phua case, the FBI fake internet repair entry, the court also grants defendant’s motion to suppress other searches based on the product of the first illegal search because they depended on the first. United States v. Phua, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69135 (D.Nev. May 28, 2015).

“[B]eing informed of the penalties under the State’s implied consent law making refusal to take a test a crime does not amount to coercion to take a chemical test. … We have likewise concluded that the implied consent advisory given prior to the onsite screening test alone is not coercive, merely by the reading of the advisory.” Rounkles v. Levi, 2015 ND 128, 2015 N.D. LEXIS 117 (May 27, 2015).*

Plaintiff’s illegal search claim was time barred. Puentes v. County of Santa Clara, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 8839 (9th Cir. May 28, 2015).*

This entry was posted in Consent, Exclusionary rule. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.