CA9: While there was no basis for def’s stop, his and his passenger’s flight after stopping was an intervening circumstance

The court agrees that there was no basis for defendant’s traffic stop, but, after defendant stopped the car, his passenger bailed out of the car and ran, and then defendant took off and went another two miles before he was stopped. That was an intervening circumstance. United States v. Santos, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 7630 (9th Cir. Mar. 15, 2019).

Defendant ordered photographic prints online which were sent to a processor in Maryland. After printing them, the printer stopped the order and notified the FBI. A subpoena was used to get his IP information, and he pleads Carpenter requires a search warrant. “This information is squarely within the third-party doctrine and requires a different result than in Carpenter. As a result, Defendant did not possess a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information obtained by law enforcement.” United States v. Therrien, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42248 (D. Vt. Mar. 13, 2019).*

This entry was posted in Attenuation, Third Party Doctrine. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.