Defendant was detained and his room aboard the Carnival cruise ship Elation was searched by the crew in investigating the death of his wife at sea. The federal regulations requiring reports of deaths at sea and the cruise line\u2019s pre-existing \u201cagreement\u201d with the FBI to so did not make the search of his belongings a government search. The federal requirement is \u201cinvestigate,\u201d not \u201csearch.\u201d The court distinguishes airline security cases because they are required to search. United States v. McGill, 718 F. Supp. 2d 1240 (S.D. Cal. 2010).<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s consent to search his vehicle was consensual to the FBI. In the course of the discussions leading up to the consent, he admitting to being a snitch (\u201cworked with\u201d a sheriff\u2019s deputy) and offered to be one for the FBI. After that he consented. United States v. Freeman, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24642 (S.D. Fla. March 16, 2010).*<\/p>\n
There was probable cause for issuance of the search warrant in this case, and the good faith exception saved it in any event. United States v. Henson, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24927 (D. Md. March 16, 2010)* (without discussion).<\/p>\n
The affidavit for the search warrant for a doctor\u2019s office in an investigation of prescribing drugs without seeing patients showed probable cause. Even if it didn\u2019t, the good faith exception applied. United States v. McKinney, 695 F. Supp. 2d 182 (E.D. Pa. 2010) [Even doctors need lawyers; this one alleged that his statements to the DEA during the officer search were uncounseled.]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading