E.D.Pa.: Search incident of a backpack dropped during handcuffing of arrestee was invalid

Defendant was stopped running from the scene of a reported robbery, and he matched the description. When he was finally stopped and hooked up, he had dropped his backpack. The police picked up the backpack and searched it, and no exception to the warrant requirement applied. Defendant was handcuffed and unable to reach in it. The government suggested inventory but did not prove anything about a policy. Inevitable discovery was speculative. United States v. Bennett, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35755 (E.D. Pa. April 8, 2010).*

Defendant was stopped for a traffic offense and having heavily tinted windows. During the stop, defendant refused consent, and the officer got the drug dog out to sniff the car, and it alerted. This continuation of the stop was with reasonable suspicion based on observations of the officer of the occupants. United States v. Gastelo-Armenta, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35739 (D. Neb. January 21, 2010).*

Defendant counsel was not ineffective for not filing a motion to suppress the search in this case. The codefendant won his suppression motion, but he had standing, and defendant did not. Since he could not prevail, defense counsel could not be ineffective. COA denied. United States v. Rodriguez-Rivera, 372 Fed. Appx. 844 (10th Cir. 2010) (unpublished).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.