Search warrant affidavit\u2019s allegation that defendant ran a \u201clarge scale\u201d drug trafficking operation is nexus to defendant\u2019s home. United States v. Murrey, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125121 (E.D. Mich. September 24, 2010):<\/p>\n
Here, SA Brouillard\u2019s affidavit in support of the search warrant for evidence of narcotics trafficking stated that, based on his training and experience, \u201c[i]t is common for drug traffickers to conceal drug records, drug proceeds … within their residences.\u201d This statement, coupled with SA Brouillard\u2019s detailed allegations linking Murrey to a large-scale cocaine distribution operation and attempts to injure law enforcement on December 2, 2008, established a sufficient nexus for the search of his residence. See also United States v. Gunter<\/a>, 551 F.3d 472 (6th Cir. 2009) (where the search warrant affidavit shows that the resident had made repeated purchases of one or more kilograms of cocaine, it was reasonable to infer there would be evidence of drug trafficking in his home). As such, Murrey\u2019s motion to be suppress should also be denied for this reason.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
This vehicle was unlicensed, and a policy to tow unlicensed vehicles is reasonable. The fact a pill bottle was not listed under the inventory does not make it invalid if it was listed as evidence seized. State v. Wotring<\/a>, 2010 Ohio 5797, 2010 Ohio App. LEXIS 4881 (11th Dist. November 24, 2010).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading