D.R.I.: Receiving three packages from China over time was not probable cause

Defendant received three packages over time from China and the Postal Inspector admitted there was no probable cause after receipt of the second, and the court finds there wasn’t for the third either. China may be an exporter of controlled substances to the U.S. [as well as electronics bought off eBay] but there was no effort at all to confirm the presence of drugs in the packages. When defendant received this package, officers came up on him to arrest or get consent, and he “back pedaled” into his dwelling. This was not exigency. The protective sweep revealed some contraband, and the view was unlawful. United States v. Graham, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135545 (D.R.I. Oct. 5, 2015).

Defendant was encountered by a plain clothes officer in an open parking lot, and he admitted having drugs on him. That justified his detention. United States v. Mitchell, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136671 (D.Me. Oct. 6, 2015).*

Defendant’s stop for walking down the middle of the road was with reasonable suspicion. United States v. Coleman, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138048 (S.D.Ind. Oct. 9, 2015).*

This entry was posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Emergency / exigency, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.