Defendant was seen parked in front of a bodega talking to two men through his open window in the winter, and he was stopped by the police for suspicion of a drug deal, but the men he was talking to were not stopped. The stop was without reasonable suspicion. United States v. Demings, 787 F. Supp. 2d 320 (D. N.J. 2011).*<\/p>\n
An unreadable paper tag was reason for a stop. \u201cThe smell of urine and feces emanating from the vehicle, and the number [15] and appearance of the passengers, provided a further basis to continue the investigation\u201d into human smuggling. United States v. Holguin, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143152 (N.D. Ga. April 11, 2011).*<\/p>\n
Failure to file a motion to suppress before trial is a waiver [which the court overlooks here]. State v. Gagne<\/a>, 2011 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 386 (May 31, 2011).*<\/p>\n Prison search was reasonable. Morgan v. Mississippi<\/a>, 427 Fed. Appx. 347 (5th Cir. 2011) (unpublished).*<\/p>\n Defendant\u2019s consent was general to the whole house, and it was voluntary. United States v. Dooley, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59324 (N.D. Ga. June 2, 2011).*<\/p>\n The court finds the credibility question in favor of the defendant that he had a cell phone in his hand that he stuck in his waistband, not a gun, so the Terry stop was unreasonable. United States v. Howard, 787 F. Supp. 2d 330 (D. N.J. 2011).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading