Generally, the absent owner of a car loaned to somebody else doesn\u2019t have standing to challenge the stop and then search of the car. United States v. Gonzalez, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162121 (E.D. Mich. November 19, 2014).<\/p>\n
Because of wiretap information, the question of consent is moot, and the officers had probable cause for the automobile exception to search a tractor trailer for drugs and money. A hearing isn\u2019t even required because the only disputed facts are consent. United States v. Aguilar, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162547 (D. Mass. November 20, 2014).*<\/p>\n
Defendant was stopped for running a red light, which he admitted, and an open container was found. His arrest on the open container violation was objectively reasonable even if it was arguable that an open container was only a citable offense under the city code. When defendant was out of the car, a gun was seen in the door storage area. It was properly seized. United States v. Patterson, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162921 (N.D. Ohio November 20, 2014).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Generally, the absent owner of a car loaned to somebody else doesn\u2019t have standing to challenge the stop and then search of the car. United States v. Gonzalez, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162121 (E.D. Mich. November 19, 2014). Because of … Continue reading