N.D.Ind.: Prior knowledge of def was RS here

The officer well knew defendant and his vehicle. “That information, combined with his recognition of Bastin as he drove by him on the highway, was enough reasonable suspicion to justify an investigatory stop, the Government contends. As for the pretext argument, the Government points out that the reasonableness of a traffic stop under the Fourth Amendment must be decided using an objective standard, not the officer’s actual purposes.” United States v. Bastin, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37615 (N.D.Ind. Mar. 3, 2022).*

This warrant was not overbroad. “Here, the affiant set forth an itemized list of evidence relating to the crimes under investigation and a list of crimes. … Together, this provided objective standards to distinguish between items subject to seizure and not subject to seizure. … It told the officers they were limited to seizing items related to the enumerated criminal activity. Defendant Carillo Lopez’s arguments regarding other language such as ‘or similar items’ fails for the same reasons, and he does not provide authority to the contrary.” United States v. Rodriguez, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36820 (W.D.Wash. Mar. 2, 2022).*

This entry was posted in Overbreadth, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.