“Fellow officer rule” applies to the information which triggers a protective sweep, which was valid here. United States v. Anderson, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87485 (W.D. N.Y. November 6, 2007):<\/p>\n
Logically, the same analysis should apply to a protective sweep in determining whether there exists “a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the house is harboring a person posing a danger to those on the arrest scene.” Buie<\/em><\/a>, 494 U.S. at 336. Specifically, in this case, the Court finds that information, possessed by Briganti reasonably led him to believe that the targets of the warrants might well be armed and dangerous and reasonably led him to so advise members of the arrest teams, including Brennan.<\/p>\n
Finally, since the Court determines that the protective sweep at issue was lawful, Brennan’s plain view observation of the business card on which there appeared names and numbers was also lawful.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
A license plate and driver’s license check which led to the discovery that the owner of the vehicle had a restricted driver’s license justified a stop on reasonable suspicion. State v. Crow<\/a>, 2007 Iowa App. LEXIS 1272 (November 29, 2007).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading