The drug dog wasn\u2019t trained on fentanyl but alerted on it. It was trained on cocaine and did alert on it. That doesn\u2019t make the dog unreliable. After probable cause developed, using the key fob to open the car wasn\u2019t unreasonable. United States v. Newby, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 228470 (E.D. Ky. Oct. 14, 2025), adopted, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 227442 (E.D. Ky. Nov. 18, 2025).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The good faith exception was litigated in state court. On habeas, defense counsel wasn\u2019t ineffective for not, essentially, arguing it better. In re Hale, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 229786 (E.D. Mich. Nov. 21, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The omitted facts don\u2019t undermine probable cause under Franks, and defendant doesn\u2019t overcome the presumption of validity of the warrant. United States v. Davis, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 229334 (M.D. La. Nov. 21, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s cell phone search issue is harmless error if error at all. People v. Brown, 2025 NY Slip Op 06409 (4th Dept. Nov. 23, 2025)* (he gets re-sentencing, however; the conviction date is three weeks short of five years from the appellate decision, and that\u2019s just appalling).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The drug dog wasn\u2019t trained on fentanyl but alerted on it. It was trained on cocaine and did alert on it. That doesn\u2019t make the dog unreliable. After probable cause developed, using the key fob to open the car wasn\u2019t … Continue reading