Just because Greyhound cooperates with the DEA in Albuquerque doesn\u2019t mean it can be sued there under the Fourth Amendment. Fernandez v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 211564 (D.N.M. Nov. 28, 2023).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Homeless in Los Angeles likely had a reasonable expectation of privacy in their stuff where they were staying, but the city didn\u2019t destroy it\u2013they moved it and told them where to go to retrieve. Therefore, no Fourth Amendment violation. People of City of L.A. Who Are Un-Housed v. Garcetti, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 211358 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 21, 2023).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A typo on the date in the body of affidavit for warrant was off a day, and it wasn\u2019t material. United States v. Hampton, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 211819 (D. Alaska Nov. 29, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant was stopped for a traffic offense that wasn\u2019t disputed, and the officer ran his ID coming up with an outstanding warrant for nonpayment of a fine. The search incident to the arrest on the outstanding warrant was valid, and the officer relied in good faith on the warrant despite defendant\u2019s contention that it converted the fine only offense into custody. State v. Grayson, 2023-Ohio-4275, 2023 Ohio App. LEXIS 4127 (1st Dist. Nov. 29, 2023).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Just because Greyhound cooperates with the DEA in Albuquerque doesn\u2019t mean it can be sued there under the Fourth Amendment. Fernandez v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 211564 (D.N.M. Nov. 28, 2023). Homeless in Los Angeles likely had … Continue reading