The USMJ hearing the motion to suppress in this case was earlier an AUSA in the office prosecuting it. She had nothing to do with this case, so recusal is not required. (\u201cNeutral and detached\u201d never mentioned.) United States v. Tyson, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150409 (N.D. Ga. Aug. 22, 2022).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Probable cause was shown for the search warrant for defendant\u2019s Instagram account. United States v. Perkins, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149852 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 22, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWhile Defendant’s appearance was one factor contributing to Agent McElroy’s decision to stop the vehicle, it was by no means the only factor. Agent McElroy also considered the area where she encountered the vehicle, her knowledge of the area and its proximity to the border, her knowledge regarding the presence of illegal alien smuggling, and the unusual driving behavior exhibited by Defendant. These factors are all relevant to the totality of the circumstances analysis under Brignoni-Ponce, and the Court finds that, considering the totality of the circumstances, Agent McElroy had a particularized and objective basis for suspecting Defendant of criminal activity.\u201d United States v. Ochoa, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150300 (D. Ariz. Aug. 19, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The USMJ hearing the motion to suppress in this case was earlier an AUSA in the office prosecuting it. She had nothing to do with this case, so recusal is not required. (\u201cNeutral and detached\u201d never mentioned.) United States v. … Continue reading