E.D.La.: No standing in car with stolen LP and no explanation for why driving it

“The Government, however, also provided evidence that the vehicle is not titled to Duncan and had a stolen license plate, arguing that these facts in conjunction establish that while Duncan possessed the vehicle, there is nothing to suggest he did so lawfully.” There was mail in the car that belonged to defendant, but that’s not enough for standing. Aside from that, there was probable cause to search it. United States v. Duncan, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38436 (E.D. La. Mar. 8, 2023).*

This stop was based on reasonable suspicion but it escalated quickly to an arrest without probable cause. The incriminating evidence should have been suppressed. State v. Maahs, 2023 Ida. LEXIS 25 (Mar. 7, 2023).*

Plaintiff’s search and seizure and privacy claim wasn’t fleshed out in the complaint, and it was properly dismissed without prejudice. Black v. Russell, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 5480 (10th Cir. Mar. 8, 2023).*

This entry was posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Arrest or entry on arrest, Standing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.