Defendant has no standing in a stolen car he is a passenger in, even if he doesn\u2019t know it\u2019s stolen. Also, a key-locked safe in the car could be opened under inventory even though the policy doesn\u2019t talk about it. United States v. Ostrum, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 198939 (N.D.Ind. Oct. 15, 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A mere typographical error in a motion to suppress isn\u2019t ineffective assistance of counsel. What\u2019s the prejudice? Plus, the court can\u2019t see what petitioner is talking about. United States v. Robinson, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 198806 (E.D.Pa. Oct. 15, 2021).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant gets the benefit of the new state rule that cause is needed for a trash pull because it\u2019s a trespass. Remanded for reconsideration. State v. Kuuttila<\/a>, 2021 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 93 (Oct. 15, 2021).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Defendant has no standing in a stolen car he is a passenger in, even if he doesn\u2019t know it\u2019s stolen. Also, a key-locked safe in the car could be opened under inventory even though the policy doesn\u2019t talk about it. … Continue reading