\u201cIn his motion to suppress, Anderson argued \u20181) The consent to search was not knowing or voluntary. 2) If the consent was knowing and voluntary, the search exceeded the scope of the consent.\u2019 Anderson now complains the search was unreasonably expanded beyond the purpose of the stop. This is a different claim, and one not raised before the district court. Therefore, it was not preserved for appeal, and we will not consider the issue.\u201d State v. Anderson, 2014 Iowa App. LEXIS 872 (August 27, 2014).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cIn his motion to suppress, Anderson argued \u20181) The consent to search was not knowing or voluntary. 2) If the consent was knowing and voluntary, the search exceeded the scope of the consent.\u2019 Anderson now complains the search was unreasonably … Continue reading