Multiple cell phones in the car in a cross-country drug transportation enterprise was probable cause for searching the phones with a search warrant. \u201cThe Court finds that these facts, considered in the totality of the circumstances, provided the issuing magistrate with a substantial basis for concluding that probable cause existed. The inclusion of the substantial amount of contraband, evidence of cross-country drug transportation, multiple cell phones, and the affiant’s significant law enforcement experience are particularly persuasive. Because the four corners of the affidavit contained sufficient content to provide the magistrate with a substantial basis for concluding that probable cause existed to search Mr. Green’s cell phones, the motion to suppress is denied.\u201d United States v. Green, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4421 (W.D. Ky. Jan. 9, 2020).<\/p>\n
2255 CoA granted on whether defendant \u201cwas prejudiced by his trial counsel’s failure to seek suppression of the search warrant issued to \u2018any Sheriff of the State of Alabama\u2019 under Ala. Code \u00a7 15-5-5.\u201d Smith v. Comm’r, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 826 (11th Cir. Jan. 9, 2020).* We don\u2019t have the pleadings, but this doesn\u2019t seem to square with Virginia v. Moore<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Multiple cell phones in the car in a cross-country drug transportation enterprise was probable cause for searching the phones with a search warrant. \u201cThe Court finds that these facts, considered in the totality of the circumstances, provided the issuing magistrate … Continue reading