C.D.Cal.: “4A privileges and immunities” are two claims, not one, and both denied here

Plaintiff’s case claimed Fourth Amendment privileges and immunities, but that’s two claims because privileges and immunities is under Art. IV, § 2, cl. 1 but it doesn’t state a claim under either. Gay v. Sheriff of L.A. Cty., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33043 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 27, 2025).*

Also holding nexus can be circumstantial: “While the nexus analysis has a ‘fact-intensive nature,’ circumstantial evidence can be sufficient to establish that there is a fair probability the place to be searched contains evidence of a crime. … Those circumstance may arise when an individual accessed a property immediately before or after a drug transaction, or where investigators can connect narcotics to a specific property.” United States v. Franco, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33271 (N.D. Ohio Feb. 25, 2025).*

There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a license plate. United States v. Winters, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33217 (N.D. Iowa Feb. 25, 2025).*

Reasonable suspicion isn’t required to run an LPN. Vigil v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 1221 (Tex. App. – Dallas Feb. 26, 2025) (unpublished).*

This entry was posted in Nexus, Privileges, Reasonable expectation of privacy. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.