E.D.Pa.: Nexus can be shown by inference

There was probable cause as to defendant’s house, with nexus a strong inference: “Here, the officers, applying their training and experience to the facts before them, reasonably inferred that Mitchell was a drug dealer and was carrying drugs and other contraband back and forth between the center of the operations on Griscom Street and the Metro Club Condos. Based on observation, security footage, and conversations with Metro Club Condo Management, Officers were able to associate Mitchell with Defendant, who resided in Unit 912 under an alias.” Moreover, the good faith exception applies. United States v. Barksdale, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54638 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 26, 2024).*

The district court rejected defendant’s attempt at a conditional plea preserving his Fourth Amendment claim. He pled guilty anyway, and that’s waiver. United States v. Herrera, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54842 (S.D. Miss. Mar. 27, 2024).*

The protective sweep was justified. Defendant was arrested right inside the door, but he had a violent history, associated with gang members, and others were in the house. United States v. Terrazas, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 7245 (5th Cir. Mar. 27, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Nexus, Protective sweep, Waiver. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.