Stop was based on weaving, and questions asked of the defendant that had nothing to do with the stop did not unlawfully extend it. United States v. Hernandez, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86309 (N.D. Tex. September 21, 2009).*<\/p>\n
The stop of the car defendant was a passenger in was justified, and he fled from the car and tossed a gun. United States v. Rodriguez-Aparicio, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86710 (D. Nev. August 24, 2009).*<\/p>\n
Inspection of a tractor trailer was justified by RS and a dog sniff because of defendant\u2019s contradictory answers about where he had been when he came through South Texas making many unusual stops and being unable to explain the stops. United States v. Rendon, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86410 (M.D. Ala. July 9, 2009).*<\/p>\n
The search warrant for defendants\u2019 premises for immigration fraud was based on probable cause and the search warrant for records was not open ended or general. United States v. Watson, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86628 (S.D. Fla. May 29, 2009).*<\/p>\n
Officers had RS that defendant was involved in a drug offense and had prior weapons offenses. That justified his patdown. The search of defendant\u2019s car trunk would be unreasonable under Gant, but it was justified by the automobile exception because of probable cause. United States v. Arnold, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87215 (E.D. Mich. September 23, 2009).*<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s stop was justified by his speeding, and the court finds that he expressly consented to a search of the vehicle. United States v. Rodriguez-Tirado, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87050 (W.D. Tenn. September 22, 2009).*<\/p>\n
While the defendant had been arrested after she admitted lying to officers, the evidence shows she voluntarily consented to a search. United States v. Berkolayko, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86965 (S.D. N.Y. September 22, 2009).*<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s 45 minute detention on I-8 between border crossings while waiting for a drug dog was not unreasonable under all the circumstances. This case differs from the defendant\u2019s primary authority involving a two hour delay of a suitcase in an airport. United States v. Macias-Encinas, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86852 (S.D. Cal. September 22, 2009).*<\/p>\n
Evidence showed that defendant consented to a search of his house, as proved by his twice offering to the police to look at a rifle in a closet and opening a nightstand drawer to show his \u201cstash.\u201d United States v. Lacy, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86970 (E.D. Wis. August 13, 2009).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading