MA: Three SWs building on each other to ultimate PC

Here there were three search warrants. The second built on the first, and the third on the second, leading to a computer search that was founded on defendant disposing of a body. “When considering the foregoing details together, there was probable cause to believe that a search of the defendant’s computer or external hard drives would yield relevant online communications between the defendant and the victim, or other relevant files concerning their relationship or the defendant’s mental state, to assist police in determining a motive for the killing or establishing the defendant’s intent. Thus, there was a sufficient nexus between the suspected crimes and the specific items sought.” Commonwealth v. Colina, 2024 Mass. LEXIS 472 (Nov. 7, 2024).

Defendant’s home was searched for evidence of violations of the Clean Air Act. The search was valid, but the interrogation in his own home was custodial, and he should have been Mirandized. United States v. Long, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 203576 (E.D. Va. Nov. 7, 2024).*

Four day delay between seizure of defendant’s vehicle and the execution of the warrant to search it was not unreasonable. Also, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying admission of body camera footage that the court doesn’t see that it supported the contention that officers planted the drugs found in the car. The court reasoned it confused the issues under F.R.E. 403 and it was not an abuse of discretion. United States v. Camardese, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 28413 (9th Cir. Nov. 8, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Admissibility of evidence, Body cameras, Custody, Probable cause. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.