Defendant\u2019s next door neighbor called 911 to report shots fired at defendant\u2019s house. When they arrived, officers set up a perimeter and entry into the curtilage was valid based on exigency, and a cartridge case was seen in plain view. Defendant\u2019s name was run, and it turned out he was a felon. Somebody had a video of him firing a gun out his back door, too. [Then the search claim is harmless error, if anything?] United States v. Hale, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7513 (W.D.Mo. Jan. 4, 2017), adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7207 (W.D.Mo. Jan. 19, 2017).<\/p>\n
The trial court apparently didn\u2019t accept that defendant was speeding, but the stop was alternatively justified by the overtinted and broken windshield. The smell of marijuana coming from the car \u201cflowered into probable cause.\u201d State v. Baugh<\/a>, 2017 La. App. LEXIS 74 (La.App. 4 Cir. Jan. 18, 2017).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Defendant\u2019s next door neighbor called 911 to report shots fired at defendant\u2019s house. When they arrived, officers set up a perimeter and entry into the curtilage was valid based on exigency, and a cartridge case was seen in plain view. … Continue reading