NC: Strip search for drugs in buttocks was based on PC

Officers had probable cause to believe that defendant had drugs secreted on his person. When a search of his clothing produced nothing, officers could then make him remove his clothes to search underneath them. Drugs were hidden in his buttocks. State v. Collins, 2016 N.C. App. LEXIS 138 (Feb. 2, 2016).

USMJ’s recommended denial of a motion to suppress a cell phone for lack of standing is remanded back for a hearing. United States v. Mobely, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11936 (N.D.Ga. Feb. 2, 2016),* R&R 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175850 (N.D.Ga. Dec. 14, 2015).*

Defendant consented to a search of his bag in the baggage compartment of a Greyhound bus at the Albuquerque station. He contended that the DEA officer conducted an illegal tactile search by feeling the bag for its contents before seeking consent (as in Bond v. United States), but there is no proof that the officer did. He denied it, and defendant didn’t see it happen. United States v. Diaz-Rivera, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11742 (D.N.M. Jan. 5, 2016).*

This entry was posted in Burden of proof, Strip search. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.