Plaintiffs \u00a7 1983 claim failed as to digging holes on their property under a search warrant for evidence from a 30 year old homicide because it was reasonable to believe some of the evidence sought would be buried. Other interpersonal actions undertaken by the police in conducting the search were sufficient to survive summary judgment. Lykken v. Brady, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35479 (D. S.D. April 30, 2008).<\/p>\n
Tip in an anonymous 911 call that defendant had a gun was not sufficiently predictive under J.L.<\/em><\/a> to justify a stop and frisk. Describing clothing is essentially nothing, and possession of a gun is not illegal under Delaware law. United States v. Waterman, 549 F. Supp. 2d 593 (D. Del. 2008).*<\/p>\n The traffic stop was executed reasonably quickly such that defendant was not unreasonably detained. While the officer never said that the defendant was free to go, the stop became consensual. United States v. Velazquez, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35378 (D. Kan. April 28, 2008):<\/p>\n An encounter does not become non-consensual merely because an officer fails to advise a driver that he was free to go. It was only after the trooper told defendant to take care and stepped away from the vehicle towards the patrol vehicle that defendant was asked if he had any illegal drugs in the vehicle, followed by a request to search the vehicle. After reviewing the video of the stop, the Court finds there is no indication that Trooper Ranieri made any “coercive show of authority” such that a reasonable person would not have felt free to leave. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading