\u201cAlthough Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment claims survive initial review, the Amended Complaint indicates that Plaintiff is currently involved in state criminal proceedings related to the arrest and seizure that form the basis of those claims. In these circumstances, the Court finds it appropriate to stay Plaintiff’s federal claims pending the resolution of the state criminal proceedings arising from Plaintiff’s September 2022 arrest. See Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384, 393-94 (2007) (citing Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 487-88 n.8 (1994)) (\u2018If a plaintiff files a false-arrest claim before he has been convicted (or files any other claim related to rulings that will likely be made in a pending or anticipated criminal trial), it is within the power of the district court, and in accord with common practice, to stay the civil action until the criminal case or the likelihood of a criminal case is ended.\u2019).\u201d Covell v. Rowland, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97188 (M.D. Tenn. June 5, 2023).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant had no standing to challenge a search of a mailed package because his name wasn\u2019t on it, and he had no connection to the recipients. In addition, his Franks challenge fails. Removing all the challenged information from the affidavit still leaves probable cause. United States v. Lopez, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96799 (S.D. Fla. June 3, 2023).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cAlthough Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment claims survive initial review, the Amended Complaint indicates that Plaintiff is currently involved in state criminal proceedings related to the arrest and seizure that form the basis of those claims. In these circumstances, the Court finds … Continue reading