TX5: SW for blood didn’t have to say it could be tested, too; why else was it drawn?

A search warrant for a blood sample doesn’t have to say that it could be tested, too. Otherwise, why draw it at all. Common sense dictates it would be. Suppression order reversed. State v. Staton, 2020 Tex. App. LEXIS 2610 (Tex. App. – Dallas Mar. 30, 2020).

Defendant’s claim of perjury in the affidavits for search warrant weren’t backed up and were waived by his guilty plea. Broderick v. United States, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54884 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 30, 2020).*

Defendant’s window tint was excessive and that justified the stop despite his argument that it was really just pretextual. Then, the smell of marijuana justified the search. United States v. Carr, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54978 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 30, 2020).*

This entry was posted in Body searches, Pretext. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.