S.D.Tex.: Officer’s failure to note everything in car didn’t undermine claim of inventory nor show pretext for search

The court credits the officer’s testimony about the purpose of the search of defendant’s car to be inventory. He made notes of the items found but not all made it into official reports. The court credits this was an innocent mistake and did not show pretext for an investigative search. United States v. Zelinger, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90968 (S.D.Tex. July 14, 2015).

Defendant standing in his open garage did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy from arrest in what amounts to a public place. United States v. Juarez-Hernandez, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90869 (N.D.Iowa July 14, 2015).*

After the traffic ticket was done, the officer had reasonable suspicion to continue the stop. “… Barry, who had an out of state license, was not able to identify to whom the car he was driving belonged; his only response to Officer Williams’ inquiry was that Fadiga knew. When asked, Fadiga stated that the car belonged to a ‘friend,’ but when he procured a rental agreement, it indicated that neither he nor Barry were authorized to drive the vehicle.” And there were other things. United States v. Fadiga, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91006 (N.D.Ind. July 14, 2015).*

This entry was posted in Inventory, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.