Defendant\u2019s post-arrest statement to the police that the car was his girlfriend\u2019s wasn\u2019t enough to show standing. He could have testified to standing without being cross-examined about the merits of the car, yet he didn\u2019t. Defendant\u2019s statement before arrest that he always had his gun with him was enough to show probable cause for the search under the automobile exception. United States v. Flournoy, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181143 (N.D.Ga. Aug. 3, 2015).<\/p>\n
Defense counsel moved to suppress and it was denied. Defendant argued in his 2255 that if it had been argued differently, the motion would have won. This argument is just frivolous. United States v. Zeno, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120352 (W.D.La. Aug. 29, 2016).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant\u2019s post-arrest statement to the police that the car was his girlfriend\u2019s wasn\u2019t enough to show standing. He could have testified to standing without being cross-examined about the merits of the car, yet he didn\u2019t. Defendant\u2019s statement before arrest that … Continue reading