NY3: Leaving one’s house to do a drug deal and returning is nexus to house

“Contrary to defendant’s contention, the CI’s basis of knowledge was not undermined by the fact that the CI did not actually enter the apartment during the controlled buys …. A sufficient nexus to the apartment was established by the continuous surveillance of defendant as he left the apartment on each occasion, traveled directly to meet the CI, and sold to the CI what was later confirmed to be crack cocaine.” People v. Merritt, 2023 NY Slip Op 03954, 2023 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3986 (3d Dept. July 27, 2023).

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not challenging the stop and search of his car where the partial license plate and the car matched one in a shooting. It was valid. Lurry v. United States, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128385 (W.D.N.C. July 25, 2023).*

“The facts and circumstances in this case support the conclusion that Mayfield’s investigation into other criminal activity did not measurably extend the duration of the stop.” Enriquez v. State, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 5438 (Tex. App. – Austin July 25, 2023).*

“We determine that even if defense counsel had filed a motion to suppress the results of the pat-down search, such a motion would have been unsuccessful.” Mubarak v. State, 2023 Iowa App. LEXIS 581 (July 25, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Ineffective assistance, Nexus, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.