MA: Defendant fled his allegedly illegal stop, so he can’t argue attenuation when he discarded contraband in flight

The trial court erred in applying the attenuation doctrine here. Defendant claimed he was illegally stopped, but he fled and discarded contraband in flight. Commonwealth v. Diaz, 2025 Mass. LEXIS 300 (June 27, 2025).

This geofence warrant was supported by probable cause. De H Nguyen v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 4532 (Tex. App. – Austin June 27, 2025).*

Defendant’s Terry stop was “intrusive and aggressive,” but the officer had reasonable suspicion defendant was a felon in possession when confronted in a bodega. United States v. Rhodes, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121818 (S.D.N.Y. June 26, 2025).*

The omissions from the affidavit don’t do anything to undermine the probable cause so a Franks hearing was properly denied. United States v. Higgins, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 15877 (6th Cir. June 27, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Attenuation, Franks doctrine, geofence, Stop and frisk. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.