Defendant was not on the rental agreement as an authorized driver of the rental car, so he lacked standing (declining to follow an unpublished decision from the same circuit). United States v. Sutmiller, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72657 (W.D. Okla. July 6, 2011).*<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s wife consented, and he was present and never objected. United States v. Mooney, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72388 (N.D. Fla. July 6, 2011).*<\/p>\n
Face-to-face encounter with a woman who reported defendant with a gun was reliable enough information for a patdown. D.P. v. State<\/a>, 65 So. 3d 123 (Fla. App. 3d DCA 2011), Rehearing denied, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 11795 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 3d Dist., July 21, 2011).*<\/p>\n Defendant was validly stopped for a violation of curfew. Given that, the request for consent was valid. People v. Leach<\/a>, 355 Ill. Dec. 266, 959 N.E.2d 680 (2011), Appeal denied by People v. Leach, 2011 Ill. LEXIS 1877 (Ill., Nov. 30, 2011).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading