The stop was with reasonable suspicion, and the frisk can occur immediately. The trial court\u2019s holding it couldn\u2019t has no support in law. State v. Lyles, 2026 Fla. App. LEXIS 5911 (Fla. 3d DCA Aug. 5, 2026).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The CI was not known to the affiant officer, but he was to the officer providing the information to the affiant. There was probable cause for the cell phone warrant. United States v. Gray, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 171016 (E.D. Cal. July 31, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe search of defendant’s vehicle was permissible under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement for the suspected offense of operating a vehicle while under the influence where defendant admitted to smoking marijuana about one hour prior to driving, a bag of marijuana was discovered on his person, and defendant was speeding, and where the arresting officer testified that defendant had bloodshot eyes and slowed speech.\u201d State v. Martin, 2026-Ohio-2959 (1st Dist. July 31, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The stop was with reasonable suspicion, and the frisk can occur immediately. The trial court\u2019s holding it couldn\u2019t has no support in law. State v. Lyles, 2026 Fla. App. LEXIS 5911 (Fla. 3d DCA Aug. 5, 2026). The CI was … Continue reading