In a homicide investigation, officers showed probable cause for defendant’s house for evidence of the murder where the victim was abducted, driven 75 miles, and her body dumped in another county. Defendant was on video surveillance where the abduction occurred, and his clothes worn the day of the abduction could be sought. Smith v. State, 2022 Ark. 95 (May 5, 2022).
“Smith generally alleges his Fourth Amendment rights were violated by the government’s interception of his mobile telephone calls without probable cause but again fails to allege ‘[s]ufficient facts … that are specific, detailed, and nonconjectural’ to support his position. Brock, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151810, 2019 WL 4213414, at 2 (citing United States v. Harrelson, 705 F.2d 733, 737 (5th Cir. 1983)). Accordingly, Smith has not shown suppression of the electronic communications is warranted.” United States v. Smith, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80855 (N.D.Miss. May 4, 2022).
Sufficient nexus to defendant’s place was shown in the search warrant affidavit. United States v. Poole, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80947 (E.D.Mich. May 4, 2022).*