Probable cause for defendant\u2019s computer for child pornography was shown by linking the IP address of a download to defendant\u2019s address. United States v. Kuntz, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37893 (D. N.D. March 29, 2011).*<\/p>\n
Officers approached the defendant\u2019s house up the driveway and could smell fresh marijuana. Defendant did not challenge the search warrant, but he did challenge how the information for it was obtained. The officers\u2019 approach up the driveway was not unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Robbins, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37578 (N.D. Iowa April 5, 2011)*:<\/p>\n
Applying these principles to the instant action, the Court concludes that officers Hoist and Hoeger did not conduct a \u201csearch\u201d when they proceeded up the driveway, through the open gates of the breezeway, onto the porch, and knocked on Defendant’s front door. It was, in fact, the only way that anyone could approach Defendant’s front door. With the gates to his breezeway open, the Court believes that Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the area adjacent to his front door. Accordingly, the officers were lawfully in the area where they first identified the smell of marijuana, thereby leading to the establishment of probable cause for a search warrant.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Defendant was stopped for a traffic violation on a bicycle for not signaling a turn. The stop was partially audio recorded by the officer, which is credited where necessary. There was a struggle and defendant was tasered. After he was subdued, a search produced a gun. It was admissible. United States v. Kelly, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37600 (W.D. La. March 15, 2011).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading