\u201cDefendant’s motion is not a model of clarity.\u201d \u201cAs an overarching concern, Defendant has not met his burden to be \u2018sufficiently definite, specific, detailed, and nonconjectural\u2019 in presenting a substantial claim as to either warrant.\u201d \u201cDefendant has not presented any argument at all regarding the sufficiency of the search warrant. He has also failed to assert that he has standing. And with regard to the arrest warrant, Defendant has not made a cogent argument that the warrant lacked probable cause or specified what relief he seeks.\u201d In re Whitfield, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 204403 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 9, 2022).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant fled Arkansas to Key West immediately after a murder, and he was arrested in Key West when his plane landed. He had property stolen from the victim on him, and the search warrant for his backpack with him was issued with probable cause to believe evidence linking him to the murder would be in there. The backpack seized in Florida on his arrest was returned to Arkansas for execution of the warrant. The parolee search waiver issue doesn\u2019t even have to be addressed. Cone v. State<\/a>, 2022 Ark. 201 (Nov. 10, 2022).* [The parole search issue was a slam dunk for the state.]<\/p>\n\n\n\n The trial court clearly didn\u2019t err in holding that a turn signal was required and defendant\u2019s failure was justification for the stop. State v. Cremeans, 2022-Ohio-3932, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 3767 (4th Dist. Oct. 19, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n Pro se prisoner plaintiff\u2019s case against the Memphis PD for his search and arrest was barred by Heck and statute of limitations. Roker v. City of Memphis, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 31167 (6th Cir. Nov. 8, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" \u201cDefendant’s motion is not a model of clarity.\u201d \u201cAs an overarching concern, Defendant has not met his burden to be \u2018sufficiently definite, specific, detailed, and nonconjectural\u2019 in presenting a substantial claim as to either warrant.\u201d \u201cDefendant has not presented any … Continue reading