W.D.Mo.: No standing in a stolen car

No reasonable expectation of privacy [standing] in a stolen car. United States v. Burkhalter, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120556 (W.D. Mo. July 13, 2023).

On a probation search, “Applying these principles, the Court finds that Brooks has failed to meet his burden to show the evidence at issue was seized through harassment. As an initial matter, the Court rejects Brooks’s argument that Dep. Consentino’s asserted basis for initiating the traffic stop—‘a cracked windshield’—necessarily constitutes harassment.” Harassment suggests a pattern. United States v. Brooks, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120317 (W.D. Tex. July 13, 2023).*

The state constitutional law of consent is fixed by the state supreme court, and this court can’t change it. State v. Bankson, 2023 Iowa App. LEXIS 548 (July 13, 2023).*

“[T]he Fourth Amendment protects liberty interests only until trial, and the Fourteenth Amendment protects against unlawful seizures ‘through and after trial.’” Mervilus v. Union Cnty., 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 17760 (3d Cir. July 13, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Consent, Due process, Standing, State constitution. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.