CA6: Govt completely failed to show nexus or PC thus no GFE

The affidavits supporting the records warrant for defendant’s home did not establish nexus between his alleged drug activity, drug records, and his address. Also, the affidavit did not allege that defendant dealt drugs from the house or that he even entered the building just before or after the controlled buy. The affidavit did not establish that defendant was a known drug dealer, nor did it provide evidence of a large ongoing drug trafficking operation or recent, reliable evidence of drug activity. The motion to suppress should have been granted for lack of probable cause and no good faith exception. United States v. Grant, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 337 (6th Cir. Jan. 6, 2023).

Defendant’s motion for return of his electronics is denied. The government alleges it still has a need to investigate. United States v. Garg, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2189 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 3, 2023).*

Defendant’s stop was based on four traffic violations, three of which were captured by dashcam, and the officer narrated them on the video. Defendant fled in the car and threw something from the window. A protective search of the car was reasonable. State v. Johnson, 2023-Ohio-30, 2023 Ohio App. LEXIS 20 (6th Dist. Jan. 6, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Good faith exception, Nexus, Protective sweep, Rule 41(g) / Return of property. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.