CA7: Possessor of a computer bag had apparent authority to consent to its search

A third party in possession of a computer case that had been passed her by the defendant had apparent authority to consent to its search. There was nothing to give the officers notice that the person in a possession had only limited authority over the computer bag. United States v. Jackson, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 5278 (7th Cir. March 12, 2010).*

Any appeal here of the trial court’s findings on reasonable suspicion would be frivolous under Anders. The findings of fact had support in the record. United States v. Gellinger, 367 Fed. Appx. 706 (7th Cir. 2010) (unpublished).*

A Franks hearing was not required where the defendant could not show that the omitted information would have changed the probable cause finding. The statements of two witnesses in the affidavit also corroborated each other and showed probable cause. Even so, the good faith exception would apply. United States v. Brown, 370 Fed. Appx. 18 (11th Cir. 2010) (unpublished).*

Apparently because of continuous conduct [the opinion isn’t clear], the 2007 warrant was not stale based on activities in 2004-05 in unlawfully exporting paddlefish roe. The argument of the search exceeding the scope of the warrant was not raised below, so it is reviewed for plain error, and it is not. United States v. Bemka Corp., 368 Fed. Appx. 941 (11th Cir. 2010) (unpublished).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.