Defendant\u2019s traffic stop was justified by not having on a seatbelt, and a drug dog alerted. His one witness was his admittedly biased girlfriend whose testimony was contradicted by the officers. Credibility goes with the officers. United States v. Enmund, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15081 (S.D. Ga. January 6, 2014),* adopted 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14992 (S.D. Ga. Feb. 6, 2014).*<\/p>\n
The plain view issue turns on whether the court believes the officer that defendant\u2019s girlfriend opened a nightstand drawer making for the plain view or the officer opened it. Based on an analysis of the credibility factors, the court goes with the officer. United States v. Gonzalez, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15103 (E.D. Pa. January 30, 2014).*<\/p>\n
The district court properly decided against plaintiffs\u2019 Fourth Amendment \u00a7 1983 claim, but it\u2019s not going to tell us what it was. Humphries v. Chicarell<\/a>i, 554 Fed. Appx. 401 (6th Cir. 2014).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading