NY4: Scope of search claim defaulted by not presenting it to trial court

A facial challenge to a search warrant is a question of law, and no hearing is required. On the application, probable cause was shown along with the CI’s reliability. Defendant’s claim the search exceeded the search warrant is defaulted for failure to raise in the trial court. People v. Navarro, 2018 NY Slip Op 00938, 2018 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 948 (4th Dept. Feb. 13, 2018).

Which officer was operating a police car’s computer terminal during a traffic stop is really irrelevant to any issue. United States v. Buchheim, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23330 (N.D. Iowa Feb. 13, 2018).*

Plaintiff in his indigent § 1983 case claims the search that led to his arrest was unreasonable, but he pleads no standing to contest the search. In addition, “The court takes judicial notice of the case action summary for Heiken’s criminal cases as maintained on the Alabama Trial Court System, hosted at www.alacourt.com. See Keith v. DeKalb Cnty., 749 F.3d 1034, 1041 n.18 (11th Cir. 2014) (holding that a federal court may ‘take judicial notice of [the State’s] Online Judicial System’).” That was necessary to ferret out facts of the underlying state case. Heiken v. Meeks, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23429 (M.D. Ala. Feb. 13, 2018).*

This entry was posted in Burden of pleading, Burden of proof, Standing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.