LA1: Look in mailbox to confirm def’s address was after they’d confirmed his apartment; not unreasonable

In the course of a homicide investigation, the victim was shown to have last talked to defendant on his cell phone just before his murder. That led to getting his picture to show to a witness who ID’d him as being the shooter. Police went to a mailbox at the apartment complex and found he had apartment 3. The mailbox was open, and the police looked at a piece of mail to confirm it was his apartment. That was not an unreasonable search. Even if it was, they’d already determined that apartment 3 was his, and that’s the independent source doctrine. State v. Magee, 2018 La. App. LEXIS 324 (La. App. 1 Cir. Feb. 27, 2018).*

The prison “open cell door policy is [not] a violation of his Fourth Amendment right to privacy” because there is practically no reasonable expectation of privacy in a prison. Stiefel v. Dep’t of Butler County Prison of Pa., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33294 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 1, 2018).*

This entry was posted in Independent source, Prison and jail searches. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.