Motion for return of cell phones is denied. The government intends to keep them pending the outcome of defendant’s 2255 or the running of the statute of limitations, which ever occurs first. That’s sufficient need to deny the motion. United States v. Latimer, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178876 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 18, 2018).
Officers were flagged down by a householder complaining of his guests and his wanting them out. The officer went to the place and talked to all three. The householder changed his mind. Shortly thereafter, he called from his bathroom saying he’d locked himself in there because he was being threatened with harm by the guests. The police got there and listened at the door because they wanted to know more about what was going on. Then the defendant came to the door and opened it, saw the officers, and slammed the door. They immediately came in, and defendant tossed down a bag of drugs. The entry was justified by exigency or emergency, and the actions of slamming the door on seeing the officers raised concerns for officer safety. State v. Owens, 2018-Ohio-4225, 2018 Ohio App. LEXIS 4551 (5th Dist. Oct. 15, 2018).*