E.D.Mo.: Flight is part of the RS calculus

Defendant fled from a police stop, and he wasn’t seized until the police laid hands on him. The hunch he was carrying a gun was correct. “First, as Officer Nash was attempting to exit his marked police car to engage Ingram, and before Officer Nash even uttered a word, Ingram fled the area on foot. Ingram did not simply walk away or ignore Officer Nash; he ran away. Officer Nash credibly testified that Ingram’s flight was suspicious. Such flight may be considered as part of the reasonable suspicion determination.” He abandoned a gun in flight. United States v. Ingram, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138224 (E.D.Mo. June 29, 2021),* adopted, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137663 (E.D.Mo. July 23, 2021).*

The officer was credible that defendant committed a traffic offense justifying the stop and then that marijuana was smelled coming from the car. That justified a search of the car. United States v. Nettles, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138227 (E.D.Mo. June 7, 2021),* adopted, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137675 (E.D.Mo. July 23, 2021).*

2255 petitioner claimed his lawyer failed to raise a Fourth Amendment claim before trial, but he doesn’t articulate what it was or that it would prevail. Denied. Roper v. United States, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137982 (S.D.Fla. July 23, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Ineffective assistance, Plain view, feel, smell, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.