LA4: Protective sweep before def arrested in pajamas reentered to get dressed was reasonable

Defendant was arrested in his pajamas, and it was appropriate for the police to conduct a protective sweep for others before he was permitted to get dressed to leave. A shotgun was validly found propped against the wall in the bedroom. State v. Diaz, 2015 La. App. LEXIS 2578 (La.App. 4 Cir. Dec. 16, 2015).

The obtaining of bank records by a Special Inquiry Judge (SIJ) under Washington law did not violate the state prohibition against privacy in bank records because the SIJ is a neutral and detached magistrate. State v. Reeder, 2015 Wash. LEXIS 1449 (Dec. 17, 2015).*

Defendant was in an accident on a freeway off ramp, and the Utah State Police were called. The officer had the vehicles move more off the road for safety purposes, and this was not a seizure and was entirely reasonable. After it was determined that defendant’s car was not insured, it was subject to impound under state law. The inventory under that impound was reasonable. United States v. Ruby-Burrow, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 168393 (D.Utah Dec. 15, 2015).

This entry was posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Inventory, Protective sweep, Seizure, Third Party Doctrine. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.