Defendant\u2019s stop was based on the Wyoming LPN coming back as expired, but it turned out that Wyoming has a different database for trucks, even pickup trucks. Shortly thereafter, the LPN was found in a different search by dispatch. The court finds on unusual facts that the passenger had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the vehicle because he was allowed to store his stuff in it and regularly use it. The inventory was found to be a general rummaging and not a valid inventory search. United States v. Gibson, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49363 (D. Nev. March 6, 2017). (Last order on Lexis was the government getting an enlargement of time to object to the R&R).<\/p>\n
Defense counsel was not ineffective, and defendant doesn\u2019t really make an argument that he was. The search of his digital camera was thoroughly briefed and decided against him. His reliance on Riley doesn\u2019t help because that involved a warrantless search. Here there was a warrant. United States v. Miller, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49545 (E.D. Mich. March 31, 2017).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant\u2019s stop was based on the Wyoming LPN coming back as expired, but it turned out that Wyoming has a different database for trucks, even pickup trucks. Shortly thereafter, the LPN was found in a different search by dispatch. The … Continue reading