Involuntary civil detainees in a sex offender program have no reasonable expectation of privacy in their rooms. White v. Dayton, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71 (D. Minn. Jan. 3, 2023).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Habeas petitioner\u2019s claim that a bad photo ID led to his false arrest and then his conviction was barred by Stone. Daniels v. Royce, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 2, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The search warrant for defendant\u2019s cell phone was issued with probable cause. State v. Byrd, 2022-NCCOA-905, 2022 N.C. App. LEXIS 939 (Dec. 29, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The exclusionary rule does not apply to probation revocation proceedings. State v. Boyette, 2022-NCCOA-904, 2022 N.C. App. LEXIS 941 (Dec. 29, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Involuntary civil detainees in a sex offender program have no reasonable expectation of privacy in their rooms. White v. Dayton, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71 (D. Minn. Jan. 3, 2023). Habeas petitioner\u2019s claim that a bad photo ID led to … Continue reading