MO: Exigency was shown at the motion to suppress, and more was shown at trial

The trial court denied the motion to suppress because the entry was by exigent circumstances. The trial testimony confirms it. State v. Bolden, 2019 Mo. App. LEXIS 1823 (Nov. 19, 2019).*

The traffic stop was justified under state law, and, during the stop and getting the driver’s license, the officer could smell marijuana and that was reasonable suspicion. United States v. Cheeks, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 34499 (11th Cir. Nov. 20, 2019).*

On the totality of circumstances, defendant’s conduct on a city street was indicative he was going from house to house to see if he could burglarize them, and that was reasonable suspicion. United States v. Churchill, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 34467 (2d Cir. Nov. 20, 2019).*

This entry was posted in Emergency / exigency, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.