Dog sniff at door of a storage unit was used to get a \u201csneak and peak\u201d warrant which was otherwise valid, and it did not violate Jardines which is limited to homes. A dog sniff like this does not violate any reasonable expectation of privacy. No binding precedent even suggests this search was illegal, so Davis good faith would apply to this warrantless search. The government conceded that it did not timely tell defendant of the \u201csneak and peak\u201d warrant, but that violation of Rule 41(f)(3) is not subject to suppression of evidence. United States v. Parrilla, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69225 (S.D. N.Y. May 13, 2014):<\/p>\n
Finally, Parrilla also moves to suppress the evidence obtained through the subsequent September 28 search warrant to remedy the Government’s failure to comply with the warrant return procedures of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41. Parrilla Mem. 9-10.2 This contention is without merit. Although the Government concedes that it violated Rule 41(f)(3) by failing to provide Parrilla with timely notice of the September 28 warrant, Gov. Mem. 44, a violation of Rule 41 does not warrant suppression “unless (1) there was ‘prejudice’ in the sense that the search might not have occurred or would not have been so abrasive if the Rule had been followed, or (2) there is evidence of intentional and deliberate disregard of a provision in the Rule.” United States v. Burke, 517 F.2d 377, 386-87 (2d Cir. 1975) (footnotes omitted); see United States v. Dewar, 489 F. Supp. 2d 351, 365 (S.D.N.Y. 2007) (applying Burke). Parrilla has [*35] not offered anything more than a conclusory statement that “the violation caused prejudice,” Parrilla Mem. \u00b6 23, and therefore has not provided any basis for suppression. Parrilla’s motion to suppress evidence from the garage searches is denied.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Dog sniff at door of a storage unit was used to get a \u201csneak and peak\u201d warrant which was otherwise valid, and it did not violate Jardines which is limited to homes. A dog sniff like this does not violate … Continue reading