MO: Plain error doesn’t revive a waived search claim

Defendant didn’t object pretrial or at trial to the search, and he can’t argue plain error now. State v. Lane, 2024 Mo. App. LEXIS 837 (Nov. 19, 2024).

The finding defendant was stopped because of a seatbelt violation is not clearly erroneous. His pretext argument fails. A bag of crack was in plain view. United States v. Noel, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 29425 (6th Cir. Nov. 19, 2024).*

A state trooper made an objectively reasonable mistake under Heien in stopping a vehicle during Covid with an expired inspection more than a year earlier. “Based on the unique facts presented in this case, and limited to these facts, following our de novo review we cannot conclude that the circuit court’s decision to deny petitioner’s motion to suppress evidence from the stop that occurred in this case was in error; it was supported by substantial evidence and was based on the court’s interpretation and application of our law and that of the Supreme Court in Heien. Accordingly, we affirm the circuit court’s order denying petitioner’s motion to suppress based on the court’s conclusion that the trooper had a reasonable suspicion to stop petitioner’s vehicle, and the reasonable suspicion rested on an objectively reasonable mistaken understanding of whether West Virginia Code section 17C-16-1 was suspended by Executive Order No. 7-20 at the time of the stop.” State v. Taylor, 2024 W. Va. LEXIS 508 (Nov. 20, 2024) (unpublished).*

This entry was posted in Burden of pleading, Mistake of law, Plain view, feel, smell, Reasonableness, Waiver. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.