TN: Parole search is a question of standing

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not challenge defendant’s parole search. In fact, “Because the search was a condition of his parole, the petitioner does not have standing to contest the search. Oody, 823 S.W.2d at 560; Turner, 297 S.W.3d at 157.” Delosh v. State, 2020 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 631 (Sept. 23, 2020).

No one factor in the totality of information the officer had was reasonable suspicion in itself, but when added up it was. It was a high crime area known for gang activity, the vehicle license was expired, and the registered owner was known to have shot two people. United States v. Dandre Montrell Gantt, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174644 (N.D. Iowa Sept. 23, 2020).*

While being questioned about an arson without Art. 31(b) warnings, a Marine consented to entry into his barracks area, and the NCIS officers could smell gasoline on tennis shoes on the floor. He was a person of interest up until then, and a suspect after. Warnings not required until he was a suspect. United States v. Metz, 2020 CCA LEXIS 334 (N.-M. Ct. Crim. App. Sept. 23, 2020).*

This entry was posted in Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion, Seizure. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.