Facebook posts of defendant\u2019s wife with a pink assault rifle and a cropped photo of a male holding a gun with face not shown was probable cause to search his residence for firearms. United States v. Walker, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120030 (E.D. Cal. July 7, 2020).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cBased upon our independent review of the record and the aforementioned body camera video recordings, we find that at the time the officers observed Carson in his vehicle, the officers did not possess a reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal activity before initiating a search of the vehicle. At every instance of Officer Forester’s testimony, he insisted that he was checking on Carson’s well-being. [\u00b6] Although we must accept the trial court’s findings of fact in ruling on a motion to suppress, we must only do so if the findings are supported by competent, credible evidence. We find that the record does not support the trial court’s findings of fact that the officers engaged Carson in a consensual encounter.\u201d State v. Carson<\/a>, 2020-Ohio-3669, 2020 Ohio App. LEXIS 2596 (8th Dist. July 8, 2020).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Facebook posts of defendant\u2019s wife with a pink assault rifle and a cropped photo of a male holding a gun with face not shown was probable cause to search his residence for firearms. United States v. Walker, 2020 U.S. Dist. … Continue reading