A motion for new trial is not the place to relitigate denial of a motion to suppress. United States v. Mack, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14024 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 16, 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There was reasonable suspicion on the totality for defendant\u2019s stop based on a corroborated \u201csnitch\u201d (as described by the officer). It was reasonable for the officer to lift defendant\u2019s shirt and that revealed a gun. United States v. Leagard, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13621 (M.D. La. Jan. 25, 2021).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe district court properly dismissed Bobadilla’s Fourth Amendment claim because Bobadilla failed to allege facts sufficient to show that the patdown search conducted by defendant Guzman was unreasonable.\u201d He also didn\u2019t factually support damages in the complaint. Bobadilla v. Lizarraga<\/a>, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 2105 (9th Cir. Jan. 26, 2021).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A motion for new trial is not the place to relitigate denial of a motion to suppress. United States v. Mack, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14024 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 16, 2021). There was reasonable suspicion on the totality for defendant\u2019s … Continue reading