{"id":1891,"date":"2008-07-29T06:11:28","date_gmt":"2008-03-19T05:04:10","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2008-03-19T05:04:10","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=1891","title":{"rendered":"Use of key taken in a search incident to effect a search warrant not unreasonable"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Officers with a search warrant could use a key seized from the defendant under a search incident to open a closet. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.ca11.uscourts.gov\/unpub\/ops\/200713153.pdf\">United States v. Herrara-Contrrras<\/a>, 269 Fed. Appx. 875 (11th Cir. 2008) (unpublished). (<em>Comment:<\/em> Better than the alternative: breaking in the door. Since the police had a search warrant and they were looking for drugs, breaking in the closet would have been lawful. So, how are the defendant&#8217;s rights violated by using a key they came into possession of through the search incident? It is annoying when they don&#8217;t use the key and break down the door, and that happens enough as it is&#8211;breaking into something without looking for a key that was present. If anything, defendant was protected against a greater invasion of his interest if the door had to be broken.)<\/p>\n<p>Anonymous crime tip on the street that left little spatial discretion to the police was corroborating people on the street pointing at cars driving away. &#8220;While quickly departing vehicles do not, in and of themselves, suggest criminal activity, it is a suspicious circumstance to be considered as part of the universe of facts. Here it becomes more significant when coupled with a number of people pointing at the vehicles as if to say &#8216;that&#8217;s them.'&#8221; <a href=\"http:\/\/ca10.washburnlaw.edu\/cases\/2008\/03\/06-2329.pdf\">United States v. Sanchez<\/a>, 519 F.3d 1208 (10th Cir. 2008).*<\/p>\n<p>Defendant&#8217;s detention was based on reasonable suspicion that he was in the country illegally based on his being associated with others who were and his claim that he had a visa and a passport in a building nearby that he could not identify. United States v. Aragon-Ruiz, 551 F. Supp. 2d 904 (D. Minn. 2008).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=1891\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1891","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1891","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1891"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1891\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1891"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1891"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1891"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}