{"id":4258,"date":"2011-03-05T12:20:15","date_gmt":"2010-06-06T09:40:54","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2010-06-06T09:40:54","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=4258","title":{"rendered":"D.Kan.: Window tinting permitted SI because of <em>McCane<\/em>"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Window tinting stop in Kansas was valid, and defendants had no valid state driver\u2019s license. One had a Mexican ID card and the other had a Mexican DL. That justified detaining them to determine whether either could lawfully drive. Calling in a drug dog during the detention was not unreasonable. The window tint violation justified a search incident which was valid under the Tenth Circuit&#8217;s <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=4755468061403609564&amp;q=u.s.+v.+grote&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=20002\">Gant<\/a> good faith case, <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=10354045663280295184&amp;q=573+F.3d+1037+&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=20002\">United States v. McCane<\/a>, because this search incident predated <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=4755468061403609564&amp;q=u.s.+v.+grote&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=20002\">Gant<\/a>. (There was, however, no probable cause to arrest for not having a valid driver\u2019s license, but that doesn&#8217;t matter in the end.) United States v. Beltran-Palafox, 731 F. Supp. 2d 1126 (D. Kan. 2010).*<\/p>\n<p>Defendant\u2019s guilty plea waived his search issue for appeal, and it was not cognizable in a \u00a7 2255 for IAC of defense counsel. His appeal to the Sixth Circuit was dismissed for the same reason. United States v. McCorkle, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53844 (W.D. Mich. March 30, 2010).*<\/p>\n<p>Defendants\u2019 stop near the border was justified by reasonable suspicion because of their location in the desert and it being highly unlikely they would be up to anything else. When stopped, the smell of marijuana came from the car. United States v. Ramon, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54360 (D. Ariz. May 13, 2010).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=4258\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/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-4258","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4258","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=4258"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4258\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4258"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4258"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4258"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}