D.Ariz.: “The standard for probable cause in forfeiture proceedings resembles that required to support a search warrant”

“‘The standard for probable cause in forfeiture proceedings resembles that required to support a search warrant. The determination of probable cause is based upon a “totality of the circumstances” test, and the government’s evidence must be more than that which gives rise to a mere suspicion, although it need not rise to the level of prima facie proof.’ [citations omitted]” United States v. One Gray 2019 BMW 330I, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112435 (C.D. Cal. May 2, 2024).*

Idaho declines to not apply the attenuation doctrine under the state constitution. Whether handcuffing was an arrest or not, the officer would have found out about defendant’s search waiver as soon as his DL was called in. State v. Campbell, 2024 Ida. LEXIS 62 (June 27, 2024).*

“Thus, the Court will adopt the R&R in large part because Agent Gonzalez provided objective and particularized reasons to initiate the stop.” United States v. Witt, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113283 (D. Ariz. June 27, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Attenuation, Forfeiture, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, State constitution. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.