Illinois law holds that a car cannot be searched for violation of the windshield obstruction statute. Defendant\u2019s car ultimately was, and the court finds that the search comported with the Fourth Amendment and state law didn\u2019t grant greater rights here. United States v. Douglas, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 255997 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 10, 2025).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(from 7\/23\/25) In a convoluted case, a liquor enforcement inspection warrant was executed during a business rush, allegedly in retaliation for asking for a warrant. Also, it appears the scope of the warrant exceeds the agency\u2019s authority over liquor control. This part of the motion to dismiss is denied pending discovery which can help clear things up. Generis Ent., LLC v. Donley, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138226 (E.D. Mich. July 8, 2025),* reconsideration denied 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 254695 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 9, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There was no reasonable suspicion to continue the stop. Defendant\u2019s pulling over before the blue lights came on isn\u2019t of much value here. Neither is nervousness or past drug charges. United States v. Catron, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 254647 (E.D. Okla. Nov. 13, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Pretrial detention is governed by the Fourth Amendment, post-trial by the Fourteenth Amendment. Hawkes v. Alconcel, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 254426 (D. Haw. Dec. 9, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Illinois law holds that a car cannot be searched for violation of the windshield obstruction statute. Defendant\u2019s car ultimately was, and the court finds that the search comported with the Fourth Amendment and state law didn\u2019t grant greater rights here. … Continue reading