\u201cBecause the officers knew that he had a tendency to talk about the case, Williams-Bey argues, Officer Roddy should have given him his Miranda warnings, rather than entertaining his question. Again, Williams-Bey provides no legal authority to support this contention.\u201d United States v. Williams-Bey, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4728 (D. Minn. Jan. 10, 2020).*<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s arrest was with probable cause based on evidence from his family, and his statement was thus otherwise admissible. White v. State<\/a>, 2020 Ga. LEXIS 2 (Jan. 13, 2020).*<\/p>\n There was probable cause for defendant\u2019s search, so defense counsel wasn\u2019t ineffective for not raising it. United States v. Williams, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 224590 (N.D. Fla. Dec. 5, 2019),* adopted, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3450 (N.D. Fla. Jan. 9, 2020).*<\/p>\n \u201cBecause the officers knew that he had a tendency to talk about the case, Williams-Bey argues, Officer Roddy should have given him his Miranda warnings, rather than entertaining his question. Again, Williams-Bey provides no legal authority to support this contention.\u201d … Continue reading \n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"