Plain view in a murder case led to an automobile exception search, and Gant was inapplicable. United States v. Brown, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83828 (D. Minn. July 30, 2009).*<\/p>\n
Law enforcement officer who was familiar with criminal activity at particular intersection who observed furtive actions by the defendant suggestive of being armed was able to make a stop and patdown of the defendant. United States v. Brown, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83932 (E.D. Va. September 14, 2009).*<\/p>\n
Smell of marijuana justified the search of defendant’s car after its stop, and defendant’s reliance on Gant was misplaced. United States v. Milan, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84033 (N.D. Tex. September 15, 2009).*<\/p>\n
Defendant consented to search when officer asked about illegal things in the car while questioning him about a suspended license. United States v. Miller, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83911 (M.D. Ala. August 27, 2009):<\/p>\n
The video shows that while writing the warning ticket, Deputy Salter began asking Miller questions about his suspended licences and at one point asked “you don’t have any guns or drugs or anything illegal in your car do you?” Miller replied “no sir, feel free to check if you want.” Thus, consent was given, and Miller’s argument is that at this point the deputy was finished writing the ticket.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading