The officer had no suspicions of defendant before drawing his gun on him. The smell of marijuana on defendant\u2019s person, but not his car, was not probable cause for a search of the car. The officer testified he was quite familiar with the impoundment policy of his department, but the court notes he had to constantly refer to it during his testimony. \u201cAlthough the Court agrees with the United States that an officer need not specifically articulate or state an intention to invoke a towing policy before conducting an inventory search, the facts in this case show that the search was investigative. Suspicion that the car might have contraband will not invalidate an otherwise valid search conducted pursuant to a towing policy.\u201d United States v. Kyle, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158264 (N.D.Ohio Aug. 23, 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defense counsel was not ineffective for not filing a motion to suppress the search of the car defendant abandoned. United States v. Odom, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158575 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 23, 2021).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant had no standing to challenge GPS tracking of someone else\u2019s car. There was also probable cause to arrest defendant for a string of robberies. United States v. Simmons, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158619 (W.D.Mo. July 8, 2021),* adopted, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157644 (W.D.Mo. Aug. 20, 2021).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The officer had no suspicions of defendant before drawing his gun on him. The smell of marijuana on defendant\u2019s person, but not his car, was not probable cause for a search of the car. The officer testified he was quite … Continue reading