C.D.Ill.: Providing the inventory of the SW execution wasn’t designed to elicit an incriminating response

Providing defendant with the inventory of what was taken in the search, a normal practice usually required by law, was not designed to elicit an incriminating response. Therefore, the statement was voluntary and not subject to Miranda. United States v. Glenn, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89507 (C.D. Ill. May 29, 2019).

Defendant’s stop for having briefly left his car with the engine running was not an offense against the Topeka Municipal Code despite the government’s argument to the contrary. Therefore, the stop was unjustified and not based on a reasonable mistake of law under Heien, and the stop is suppressed. United States v. Brock, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89562 (D. Kan. May 29, 2019).*

This entry was posted in Reasonableness, Warrant execution. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.