MO: Where 2 SWs authorize search, both have to be suppressed for def to prevail; challenging only one is moot

There were two search warrants authorizing the search of defendant’s computers for child pornography. He challenged the second but not the first, and that makes his argument moot. State v. Cato, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 1298 (Dec. 12, 2017).

A parole search requires the parole officer assigned to defendant be present. The court won’t go so far as to say that’s required for a probation search. Besides, this wasn’t presented to the trial court, and it’s waived. State v. Sinegal, 2017 La. App. LEXIS 2330 (La.App. 3 Cir. Dec. 13, 2017).*

This entry was posted in Burden of proof, Computer searches, Standards of review. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.