Where the state is relying on the \u201cnew crime\u201d exception to the exclusionary rule, it needs to raise it before a motion to reconsider or it\u2019s waived. State v. Rousseau, 2024 N.H. LEXIS 125 (June 18, 2024).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s criminal history plus, \u201c[b]ased upon his experience and training, Detective Hourihan concluded Belton engaged in multiple hand-to-hand drug transactions. The presented facts, taken together, support the trial court’s conclusion that the police had a reasonable suspicion to initiate a Terry stop.\u201d State v. Belton, 2024-Ohio-2357 (8th Dist. June 20, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cHere, the warrant is sufficiently particular because it limits the scope of the search warrant to the evidence, instruments, and contraband related to the specific incident described in the affidavit of probable cause, thereby limiting the discretion of the officer in searching the vehicle. Further, the warrant itself enumerates seven different crimes the evidence could be connected to, including recklessly endangering another person, carrying a firearm without a license, fleeing a police officer, traffic violations, robbery, and simple assault.\u201d Further, the affidavit accompanied the warrant to the search. United States v. Johnson, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108690 (M.D. Pa. June 20, 2024).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Where the state is relying on the \u201cnew crime\u201d exception to the exclusionary rule, it needs to raise it before a motion to reconsider or it\u2019s waived. State v. Rousseau, 2024 N.H. LEXIS 125 (June 18, 2024). Defendant\u2019s criminal history … Continue reading