The delay between the search and the seizure of defendant\u2019s cell phones seized on his arrest was 101 days long, but, compared to the reduced privacy interest in the phone because of evidentiary value, it was not constitutionally unreasonable. United States v. Corbett, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 191323 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In concurring to an Anders opinion, a dissenting judge finds a failure to announce shown on bodycam video until after the officers were inside was enough to rebrief. State v. Robinson<\/a>, 2021-NCCOA-533, 2021 N.C. App. LEXIS 531 (Oct. 5, 2021).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Fourth Amendment issue presented on appeal is not the same as the issue tried in the suppression motion, so it is waived. State v. Cox<\/a>, 2021-NCCOA-551, 2021 N.C. App. LEXIS 550 (Oct. 5, 2021) (unpublished).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The delay between the search and the seizure of defendant\u2019s cell phones seized on his arrest was 101 days long, but, compared to the reduced privacy interest in the phone because of evidentiary value, it was not constitutionally unreasonable. United … Continue reading