Plaintiff states a claim against the Philadelphia Parking Authority for detaining his temporarily impounded taxi for a later search without justification. Mbagwu v. PPA Taxi & Limousine Div., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 167790 (E.D. Pa. Sep. 16, 2022).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A cross-sex strip search of a Muslim inmate stated a claim under Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA). The rest to be determined on remand. West v. Radtke, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 25978 (7th Cir. Sep. 16, 2022).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There was probable cause on the totality for a search without mentioning all the CI\u2019s information. The fact \u201cdrugs\u201d aren\u2019t mentioned in the texts isn\u2019t material. \u201cOfficers need not hear \u2018magic words\u2019 before seeking a warrant. Cf. United States v. Allen, 211 F.3d 970, 975 (6th Cir. 2000) (en banc).\u201d United States v. Dawson<\/a>, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 25980 (6th Cir. Sep. 15, 2022).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Decriminalization of small amounts of marijuana wasn\u2019t legalization, so there was still probable cause for the search. Hall v. State, 2022 Md. App. LEXIS 676 (App. Sep. 15, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Plaintiff states a claim against the Philadelphia Parking Authority for detaining his temporarily impounded taxi for a later search without justification. Mbagwu v. PPA Taxi & Limousine Div., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 167790 (E.D. Pa. Sep. 16, 2022). A cross-sex … Continue reading