The government\u2019s alterative theories to support the search were sufficient to avoid even deciding a good faith mistake of fact by the officers. Moreover, defendant never addressed the government\u2019s alternative arguments in his briefing. United States v. Bell-Johnson, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45821 (D. Kan. Mar. 17, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There was reasonable suspicion for defendant\u2019s stop and frisk because there was reason to believe that he had a gun. United States v. Clark, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45226 (E.D. Va. Mar. 16, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant consented to the search of his text messages. \u201cBoth officers who testified commented on how cooperative Barton was in all of their interactions. When Officer McKay approached him at the gate, he freely shared the text communications on his phone. Barton does not appear to dispute that this information was provided voluntarily. His dispute as to consent focuses on his signing of the consent to search form after he mentioned needing an attorney.\u201d United States v. Barton, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45622 (D. Utah Mar. 16, 2023).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The government\u2019s alterative theories to support the search were sufficient to avoid even deciding a good faith mistake of fact by the officers. Moreover, defendant never addressed the government\u2019s alternative arguments in his briefing. United States v. Bell-Johnson, 2023 U.S. … Continue reading