IN: Unaccounted-for gun did not justify a “community care taking” entry

The fact a gun was unaccounted for was not sufficient for a “community care taking” entry of defendant’s house on only a possible ordinance violation. Trotter v. State, 933 N.E.2d 572 (Ind. App. 2010).*

Defendant waived any particularity issue because it was not raised until the trial was underway. Three years passed between the search and the original denial of the motion. “[N]o good cause exists for the failure to raise the issue of the warrant’s particularity.” Even on the merits, defendant would lose because there was no way the officers would know there was a Garrison-type problem with the location until they got there, and it is not apparent that there was. “The Court believes Trooper Thompson acted reasonably and that he was not confronted with a multi-unit building.” United States v. Kaplan, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94987 (E.D. Pa. September 13, 2010).*

USMJ finds that the police justification for the stop of defendant’s tractor trailer was not based on “defective equipment” since nobody could say what that was. They all admitted the DEA wanted the truck stopped. United States v. Moore, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95047 (E.D. Mich. July 14, 2010).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.