{"id":19635,"date":"2015-11-23T00:15:42","date_gmt":"2015-11-23T05:15:42","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=19635"},"modified":"2015-11-22T13:07:14","modified_gmt":"2015-11-22T18:07:14","slug":"oh4-defendant-didnt-have-standing-to-challenge-pole-camera-surveillance-of-friends-house","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=19635","title":{"rendered":"OH4: Defendant didn&#8217;t have standing to challenge pole camera surveillance of friend&#8217;s house"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Defense counsel was not ineffective for not raising a technical challenge that, at the time, was meritless but the law later changed. The exclusionary rule wouldn\u2019t apply. He also lacked standing to challenge pole camera surveillance of somebody else\u2019s house. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.supremecourt.ohio.gov\/rod\/docs\/pdf\/4\/2015\/2015-Ohio-4733.pdf\">State v. Tolbert<\/a>, 2015-Ohio-4733, 2015 Ohio App. LEXIS 4611 (4th Dist. Nov. 12, 2015).<\/p>\n<p>Defendant\u2019s stop was justified for following too close, and the conversation with him led to reasonable suspicion. United States v. Kash, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154830 (E.D.Cal. Nov. 16, 2015).*<\/p>\n<p>Plain error review doesn\u2019t work for a claim that officers didn\u2019t see defendant actually consume alcohol when his condition pretty much showed he had. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.tsc.state.tn.us\/sites\/default\/files\/wellsaustinopn_0.pdf\">State v. Wells<\/a>, 2015 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 919 (Nov. 16, 2015).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Defense counsel was not ineffective for not raising a technical challenge that, at the time, was meritless but the law later changed. The exclusionary rule wouldn\u2019t apply. He also lacked standing to challenge pole camera surveillance of somebody else\u2019s house. &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=19635\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[92,35,34],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-19635","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-pole-cameras","category-reasonable-suspicion","category-standing"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19635","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\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=19635"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19635\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":19636,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19635\/revisions\/19636"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=19635"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=19635"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=19635"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}