E.D.Ky.: Being a lookout vehicle at a crime is RS

As to the stop of the vehicle: “The objective and articulable facts set forth above supported the officers’ belief that the Buick was either the lookout vehicle or the vehicle transporting the narcotics and gave rise to reasonable suspicion to conduct a traffic stop. As such, no Fourth Amendment violation occurred when the officers conducted a traffic stop of the Buick.” “Birkla primarily seeks suppression of any evidence of his presence at the scene of the traffic stop. This poses an interesting question. Are identity and presence suppressible fruits? As explained below, the answer is ‘no,’ and because Birkla’s Fourth Amendment rights were not otherwise infringed, the Court will DENY Defendant Birkla’s Motion.” United States v. Birkla, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132299 (E.D. Ky. June 15, 2026).*

“[T]he search warrants for his location data and Facebook records were supported by probable cause. … [H]e has not made an initial showing that the affidavits for the search warrants contained reckless and material omissions, so he is not entitled to a Franks hearing.” Motion to suppress denied. United States v. Leiva-Leiva, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132900 (E.D. Cal. June 15, 2026).*

This entry was posted in Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Social media warrants. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.