Under the Puerto Rico Constitution, unlawfully seized evidence is inadmissible, and this includes forfeiture cases. Cruz v. Commonwealth 2025 PR App. LEXIS 2293 (Sept. 23, 2025).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The probable cause question here doesn\u2019t have to be decided. Suffice it to say that there\u2019s enough that it\u2019s in good faith. United States v. Bridges, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 201510 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 10, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
CoA denied. \u201cJones has not made the requisite showing. See Slack, 529 U.S. at 484. We do not consider his newly raised claims that defense counsel’s purported ineffectiveness constitutes \u2018cause\u2019 to excuse his procedurally defaulted claims, that his counsel was ineffective in failing to raise a Fourth Amendment claim at trial \u2026.\u201d Jones v. Mississippi, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 26557 (5th Cir. Oct. 10, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Plaintiffs state enough of a continued seizure in a traffic stop to get to a jury. Rodriguez had been decided before this happened. Caton v. Salamon, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 26546 (6th Cir. Oct. 10, 2025).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Under the Puerto Rico Constitution, unlawfully seized evidence is inadmissible, and this includes forfeiture cases. Cruz v. Commonwealth 2025 PR App. LEXIS 2293 (Sept. 23, 2025). The probable cause question here doesn\u2019t have to be decided. Suffice it to say … Continue reading