PA: PO search of parolee’s visitor required RS which was lacking

Under a parole search of one Scott in his home, the PO had authority to frisk the visitor defendant if he had safety concerns or reasonable suspicion, and here they did not. Commonwealth v. Gibson, 2025 PA Super 65, 2025 Pa. Super. LEXIS 127 (Mar. 19, 2025).

Defendant’s claim the stop was prolonged without reasonable suspicion fails. There was a warrant for his arrest. United States v. Rainey, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6452 (6th Cir. Mar. 19, 2025).*

As to a Franks claim: “As the Magistrate Judge concluded, Petitfrere’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel fails because he has not alleged any facts suggesting that his attorney’s performance was deficient nor shown that he was prejudiced by such performance.” United States v. Petitfrere, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49841 (E.D. Ky. Mar. 19, 2025).*

A threat to arrest for trespass doesn’t state a Fourth Amendment claim. Kelly v. Gallagher, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49905 (D. Ariz. Mar. 18, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Franks doctrine, Probation / Parole search. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.