{"id":8863,"date":"2013-07-26T09:57:04","date_gmt":"2013-06-10T07:07:48","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2013-06-10T07:07:48","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=8863","title":{"rendered":"MS: Search in forfeiture case is challenged only by motion to suppress; not a merits issue"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>A Fourth Amendment claim to forfeiture is made pretrial by a motion to suppress. Lack of probable cause is not a defense to forfeiture. <a href=\"http:\/\/courts.ms.gov\/Images\/Opinions\/CO85513.pdf\">Twenty Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars $20,800.00 in United States Currency v. State ex rel. Miss. Bureau of Narcotics<\/a>, 115 So. 3d 137 (Miss. App. 2013).*<\/p>\n<p>On an interlocutory government appeal from suppression, the defendant cannot seek additional suppression of evidence because that must await final appeal. There was reasonable suspicion for detention of defendants, and a drug dog validly alerted on their tractor-trailer. \u201cTherefore, defendants&#8217; detention did not cause the government&#8217;s discovery of the challenged evidence. Put another way, the agents did not \u2018exploit[]\u2019 defendants&#8217; seizure to discover the evidence; it was discovered \u2018by means sufficiently distinguishable\u2019 from that seizure. See Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 487-88, 83 S. Ct. 407, 9 L. Ed. 2d 441 (1963). Defendants&#8217; case for suppression therefore fails on the requirement of causation: \u2018The exclusionary rule forbids the government from using evidence caused by an illegal seizure, not evidence found around the time of a seizure.\u2019 Clariot, 655 F.3d at 555. It does not apply here.\u201d <a href=\"http:\/\/www.ca6.uscourts.gov\/opinions.pdf\/13a0159p-06.pdf\">United States v. Figueredo-Diaz<\/a>, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 11231, 2013 FED App. 0159P (6th Cir. June 5, 2013).<\/p>\n<p>The finding of the gun in this case came from a valid plain view during a protective sweep of defendant\u2019s place when he was arrested for armed robbery. <a href=\"http:\/\/courts.ms.gov\/Images\/Opinions\/CO84827.pdf\">Hutto v. State<\/a>, 114 So. 3d 802 (Miss. App. 2013).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=8863\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8863","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8863","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=8863"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8863\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=8863"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=8863"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=8863"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}