Plaintiffs alleged a Fifth Amendment taking because the government took their truck to do a drug operation. The claim survives a motion to dismiss. “Because plaintiffs do not challenge the legality of the government’s action, we deny the jurisdictional challenge. Because plaintiffs sufficiently allege actions which are inconsistent with the exercise of police power, we also deny the motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6).” Craig Thomas Expeditors LLC v. United States, 2018 U.S. Claims LEXIS 94 (Feb. 16, 2018).
The order denying defendant’s motion for return of property was not shown to be a final order and thus not yet appealable. Whitney v. State, 2018 Ark. App. 128, 2018 Ark. App. LEXIS 121 (Feb. 14, 2018).*
Officer’s knowledge that defendant possessed a firearm was not reasonable suspicion in itself because one could possess a firearm in the VI, albeit with a license. When officers observed bullet holes in the car and defendant was nervous and evasive, there was reasonable suspicion. The search of defendant’s vehicle, however, was unreasonable for lack of exigency. Defendant as in the back of a police car. The government tried to justify the search as an inventory, but the vehicle was not taken into custody for there to be an inventory. People v. Freeman, 2018 V.I. LEXIS 15 (Super. Ct. Feb. 7, 2018).
The government adequately showed nexus to search defendant’s house because it showed probable cause to believe he was an active drug dealer that likely was keeping his stash at home. United States v. Rosario, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23164 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 13, 2018):
Defendant did not violate the traffic statute that the officer stopped him for. Therefore, Heien’s reasonable mistake of law and good faith doesn’t apply. Moreover, there is no good faith exception in Georgia. Harris v. State, 2018 Ga. App. LEXIS 67 (Feb. 14, 2018).
The circuit court erred in granting a defendant’s motion for return of property based on two attached documents where the state didn’t even get a chance to respond. The facts were in dispute on whether the money was evidence or forfeitable. The state claimed it was evidence for defendant’s drug trial. Clayton v. State, 2018 Fla. App. LEXIS 2235 (Fla. 2d DCA Feb. 14, 2018).
Being in a high crime area and then becoming defensive only when the officer asked defendant where his mother lived when it came up was not reasonable suspicion. Defendant’s frisk was unreasonable on the totality. Suppressing the gun found on him necessitates vacating his firearms conviction. United States v. Heard, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 3447 (11th Cir. Feb. 12, 2018).
“Although defendant was the driver and sole occupant of the Buick, and undoubtedly had a subjective expectation of privacy, he has not established a reasonable expectation of privacy in the vehicle. Defendant had not been authorized by the owner of the vehicle to drive the Buick, and did not have a valid license to drive any vehicle. Such an unauthorized driver does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the vehicle.” United States v. English, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23011 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 13, 2018).*
A federal suit to have the Guam Superior Court revisit its probable cause determination in a criminal case is barred by Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Santos v. Superior Court of Guam, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 3433 (9th Cir. Feb. 14, 2018).
Defendant was more than reasonably suspected of committing a homicide in Indiana, and police got a line on him heading to Kentucky. A vehicle matching the description of his was seen on the nearest bridge to Kentucky shortly thereafter and Indiana law enforcement pursued him to Kentucky and arrested him. His arrest in Kentucky did not violate the Fourth Amendment because there was sufficient cause. It also did not violate the state constitution which the Indiana courts will interpret more broadly. Whitt v. State, 2018 Ind. App. LEXIS 56 (Feb. 14, 2018). As to the state constitution:
The stop was for a traffic offense, and two detectives stopped to participate. Their questions about smelling marijuana didn’t unreasonably extend the stop. Commonwealth v. Buckley, 2018 Mass. LEXIS 87 (Feb. 14, 2018):
“Although the factors [on CI reliability] go both ways, on balance they support the CI’s reliability. Most significantly, the deputies corroborated the CI’s story with their own investigation by conducting surveillance and executing a controlled buy.” United States v. Haynes, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 3380 (7th Cir. Feb. 14, 2018).*
Plaintiff’s Bivens claim for excessive force in roughly handcuffing a completely compliant arrestee by a park ranger in Death Valley stated a claim for relief. Motion to dismiss denied. Knickerbocker v. United States, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23603 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 13, 2018).*
New Republic: Should Cops Be Allowed to Rip Up Your Stuff While Looking for Drugs? by Matt Ford:
How the Supreme Court can curtail the destruction of private property during police searches