There were four GPS warrants on the defendant\u2019s car, owned by his wife, June-October 2014, renewed in state court every 30 days. The court can\u2019t conclude they were started on stale information since it referred to an ongoing drug operation. The warrant was thin as to ID\u2019g defendant as the driver, but deference is required, and the court can\u2019t find no probable cause. Defendant repeatedly went to a stash house. Charged, but yet unproved, conduct can appear in a search warrant affidavit. United States v. Smith, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74395 (E.D.N.C. June 9, 2015).<\/p>\n
Handcuffing here was reasonable during a Terry stop after a traffic stop after it appeared defendant threw a baggie of drugs into the passenger\u2019s lap. United States v. Davis, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74097 (W.D.Mo. June 9, 2015),* R&R 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74960 (W.D.Mo. May 13, 2015).*<\/p>\n
Defendant as a 2255 petitioner had a full and fair opportunity to litigate his suppression motion, did, and lost and then pled guilty. He can\u2019t raise it on collateral review. Roberts v. United States, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74240 (M.D.N.C. June 9, 2015).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
There were four GPS warrants on the defendant\u2019s car, owned by his wife, June-October 2014, renewed in state court every 30 days. The court can\u2019t conclude they were started on stale information since it referred to an ongoing drug operation. … Continue reading