Defendant argues that his stop wasn\u2019t justified because the police officer paced him with the uncalibrated speedometer on his unmarked car. The question, though, is reasonable suspicion, and aside from speeding there was a window tinting violation. So, the stop was justified by either. United States v. Myers, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144214 (E.D. Va. Aug. 24, 2018).<\/p>\n
The search warrant for defendant\u2019s airplane was on probable cause on the totality. \u201cHere, the CHS’ statements were abundantly corroborated, and cross-corroborated, through the personal contacts between an FBI agent and Holland, Holland and Weverka, the Sheriff and Weverka, an FBI agent and Weverka, and the calls, many of which were recorded, between the CHS and Weverka and between the CHS and Holland. In addition, those statements explained the flight itinerary found when Parsons was arrested and Parsons’ motivation to apply for FAA certification to pilot an airplane.\u201d Even if there was no probable cause there was certainly enough that the good faith exception applies. United States v. Parsons, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144591 (D. Neb. July 2, 2018).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant argues that his stop wasn\u2019t justified because the police officer paced him with the uncalibrated speedometer on his unmarked car. The question, though, is reasonable suspicion, and aside from speeding there was a window tinting violation. So, the stop … Continue reading