Defendant who did not have a possessory interest in a car did not have standing to contest installation of a GPS device, even if it violated the rights of the owner under Jones. United States v. Maldonado, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99992 (D. Minn. July 19, 2012).<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s 2255 claim that the search exceeded the consent was decided on direct appeal. Also, watching a search by consent and not objecting to scope supports that the search was within the scope of the consent. United States v. Greer, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100121 (D. Neb. July 19, 2012).*<\/p>\n
The officer had reasonable suspicion after defendant\u2019s stop because defendant acted in a manner potentially consistent with criminal activity when he shook uncontrollably, stared straight ahead without looking at the officer, and refused to cooperate with lawful requests to exit the vehicle. United States v. Hill<\/a>, 492 Fed. Appx. 365 (4th Cir. 2012).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading