Defendant was in a car accident that killed his passenger. Both were taken to a trauma center, but defendant wasn\u2019t hurt much at all, complaining only of hip pain. The hospital drew blood as a standard protocol for a trauma center. The police obtained it afterwards and it was .188%. This was purely a private search because the police didn\u2019t ask the hospital to make the blood draw. Then, defendant consented to the police getting it from the hospital. United States v. Bandin, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19890 (D. Ariz. February 18, 2014).*<\/p>\n
Defendant and another man brought a shooting victim to the ER, and he wasn\u2019t cooperative when confronted by security then the police. Ultimately he was handcuffed and detained, and it was without probable cause or reasonable suspicion. His statements after that thus are suppressed as fruit of the poisonous tree. State v. Thorpe<\/a>, 2014 N.C. App. LEXIS 177 (February 18, 2014).*<\/p>\n The search warrant was issued with probable cause as to defendant, and it was particular and not overbroad. It was limited to drug related evidence. State v. Gonzales<\/a>, 2014-Ohio-557, 2014 Ohio App. LEXIS 537 (3d Dist. February 18, 2014).*<\/p>\n Based on the findings of fact, defense counsel could not be ineffective for not appealing denial of the motion to suppress because it would not be reversed. State v. Fultz<\/a>, 2014 Wisc. App. LEXIS 126 (February 17, 2014).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading