Defendant was approached in his car because of outstanding warrants. He got out of the car as police approached him and tossed a bindle of drugs. He was a \u201crecent occupant\u201d of the car for search incident purposes, and he demonstrated control of the car by locking the door with the remote as he got out. Robbins v. Commonwealth, 336 S.W.3d 60 (Ky. 2011).<\/p>\n
Nervousness alone not enough for reasonable suspicion, but here there was more. Worthy v. State, 91 So. 3d 762 (Ala. Crim. App. 2011), later proceeding at, 2011 Ala. Crim. App. LEXIS 159 (Ala. Crim. App., July 15, 2011)*:<\/p>\n
The nervousness Allen and Smitherman detected from Worthy and his passenger is by itself insufficient to create a reasonable suspicion justifying further detention. Nonetheless, this nervous behavior combined with Worthy\u2019s evasiveness regarding the identity of his passenger, the conflicting stories by Worthy and his passenger regarding the starting point of their trip, Worthy\u2019s failure to disclose his prior marijuana arrest, and the fact that the rental car Worthy was driving was three days overdue combine to create a reasonable suspicion of concealment of criminal activity.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Defendant was essentially a squatter selling drugs in one of the places searched, so he had no standing. The owner told the police it was vacant at the time of the search. United States v. Solomon, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48010 (M.D. N.C. May 4, 2011).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading