{"id":3429,"date":"2010-05-16T20:07:57","date_gmt":"2009-10-09T07:43:14","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2009-10-09T07:43:14","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=3429","title":{"rendered":"CA5: Tasering that did not stop defendant was not a seizure"},"content":{"rendered":"

Two men fled from a police stop. One was tasered and seized, and appellant was hit by only one probe and escaped. He dropped evidence after the tasering. He was not seized when the evidence was dropped. United States v. Jones<\/a>, 347 Fed. Appx. 129 (5th Cir. 2009) (unpublished).<\/p>\n

Search and seizure of a cellphone was proper under a search warrant. United States v. Correa<\/a>, 347 Fed. Appx. 541 (11th Cir. 2009) (unpublished). Here, the language of the warrant did not say “cellphones,” but it was close enough to easily include it:<\/p>\n

The warrant granted agents the authority to seize “written records of names, addresses, telephone numbers and\/or photographs, and\/or other information regarding buyers, manufacturers and sellers of narcotics, including but not limited to digitally recorded numbers on caller identification units and pagers and any other evidence that may be connected in the commission of the crime.” The agents reasonably concluded that Correa’s cellular telephone, a “known tool of the drug trade,” contained digital evidence about the conspiracy. United States v. Nixon, 918 F.2d 895, 900 (11th Cir. 1990).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

There was sufficient proof supporting defendant’s warrantless arrest for a felony under Pringle<\/a>. United States v. Jones<\/a>, 345 Fed. Appx. 872 (4th Cir. 2009) (unpublished)*; Williams v. State, 2009 Md. App. LEXIS 158 (October 1, 2009).*<\/p>\n

There was reasonable suspicion for stopping defendant based on his Mexican license plate being partially obstructed under state law. Also, defendant did not argue below as a mistake of law vs. mistake of fact, so that had to be reviewed for plain error, which it wasn’t. United States v. Montes-Hernandez<\/a>, 350 Fed. Appx. 862 (5th Cir. 2009) (unpublished).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3429","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3429","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3429"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3429\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3429"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3429"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3429"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}