Category Archives: Protective sweep

AK: Protective sweep could precede probation search

The challenged part of the home search here was a protective sweep before a probation search, and it was reasonable. Elisoff v. State, 2016 Alas. App. LEXIS 118 (June 22, 2016) (mem.).* 2255 petitioner’s claim that his defense counsel was … Continue reading →

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on AK: Protective sweep could precede probation search

CA1: Seizure of a cell phone to get a SW was proper; frisk of jacket for weapon was, too

Officers suspected defendant of sex trafficking, and Detroit PD called the Portland ME PD to report he was there, likely with a young girl. He was known to them as a prior sex trafficker. They found him at a hotel … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Protective sweep | Comments Off on CA1: Seizure of a cell phone to get a SW was proper; frisk of jacket for weapon was, too

D.R.I.: Protective sweep of car justified by def being, inter alia, in a violent biker gang and having a 19 pg criminal history

Protective sweep of car was justified because defendant was a member of a violent biker gang, nervousness, 19-page criminal history, volunteering he hadn’t been drinking when not asked, among other things. United States v. Severns, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76103 … Continue reading →

Posted in Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.R.I.: Protective sweep of car justified by def being, inter alia, in a violent biker gang and having a 19 pg criminal history

E.D.Mo.: 911 call of burglary in progress and open door with blood justified entry

911 received a burglary in progress report, and officers responded finding the door open and damaged, blood on the broken window, and the home alarm going off. Exigent circumstances permitted the entry because it was reasonable to infer that the … Continue reading →

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Plain view, feel, smell, Protective sweep | Comments Off on E.D.Mo.: 911 call of burglary in progress and open door with blood justified entry

MA: Def’s furtive movement was hiding a small quantity of MJ, and that didn’t justify search of the backseat area when he was out of car

During a traffic stop, defendant lifted himself up consistent with hiding something, and that justified an order to get out of the car. When only a small quantity of marijuana was found, the exigency dissipated, and a search of the … Continue reading →

Posted in Protective sweep, Scope of search | Comments Off on MA: Def’s furtive movement was hiding a small quantity of MJ, and that didn’t justify search of the backseat area when he was out of car

D.Neb.: Protective sweep justified by arrest on weapons charges, somebody peeking through blinds, and sounds from inside

Officers executing an arrest warrant for weapons charges had reasonable suspicion for a protective sweep based on sounds from the basement and somebody peeking through the blinds. United States v. Alatorre, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69171 (D.Neb. May 26, 2016). … Continue reading →

Posted in Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.Neb.: Protective sweep justified by arrest on weapons charges, somebody peeking through blinds, and sounds from inside

D.Nev.: Omission of details of a protective sweep not Franks issue where magistrate had to know about it

Police officer’s omission of details of a protective sweep from an affidavit for a search warrant did not support a Franks claim as to how he reported responding to a 911 shots fired call. The protective sweep wasn’t even hidden; … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Protective sweep | Comments Off on D.Nev.: Omission of details of a protective sweep not Franks issue where magistrate had to know about it

NJ: A rifle case on a felon’s porch seen in a protective sweep qualifies for plain view; its incriminating nature is immediately apparent

Defendant was arrested in his house, and a protective sweep of the porch was valid. In plain view was a rifle case, and defendant was a felon in possession. It was reasonable to seize the rifle. State v. Cope, 2016 … Continue reading →

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Protective sweep | Comments Off on NJ: A rifle case on a felon’s porch seen in a protective sweep qualifies for plain view; its incriminating nature is immediately apparent

KS: Mailed package with contraband to address justifies SW for address

A package in the mail addressed to a house that has suspected contraband in it justifies an anticipatory warrant for the whole house. State v. Mullen, 2016 Kan. LEXIS 242 (April 22, 2016). Defendant’s furtive movements during a traffic stop … Continue reading →

Posted in Anticipatory warrant, Protective sweep | Comments Off on KS: Mailed package with contraband to address justifies SW for address

M.D.Ga.: Anticipatory warrant’s condition clearly occurred so search valid

The triggering condition in the anticipatory warrant clearly occurred, and the warrant was timely executed. United States v. Bright, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51979 (M.D.Ga. April 19, 2016).* Aside from other indicators of driving under the influence defendant consumed a … Continue reading →

Posted in Anticipatory warrant, Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on M.D.Ga.: Anticipatory warrant’s condition clearly occurred so search valid

CA8: Protective sweep of a camper was reasonable because another was inside when def was arrested

Defendant was supposed to sell methamphetamine from his camper at a campsite to an undercover officer, but he declined, so the officer attempted to arrest him outside the camper on an outstanding warrant and he fled. He went to the … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Probable cause, Protective sweep | Comments Off on CA8: Protective sweep of a camper was reasonable because another was inside when def was arrested

OH5: Entry permitted by 911 call of unresponsive person; protective sweep factually unjustified

A 911 call about an unresponsive man was justification for a warrantless entry into defendant’s apartment, but no facts justified a protective sweep once inside. Heroin in bedroom suppressed. State v. Levengood, 2016-Ohio-1340, 2016 Ohio App. LEXIS 1227 (5th Dist. … Continue reading →

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Protective sweep | Comments Off on OH5: Entry permitted by 911 call of unresponsive person; protective sweep factually unjustified

MA: If arrest invalid, inventory based on it is too

Defendant’s arrest was invalid, so the inventory of his car was invalid. Commonwealth v. Williams, 2016 Mass. Super. LEXIS 19 (Wooster Feb. 18, 2016). The protective sweep here was invalid, but that did not require suppression of the search. Excising … Continue reading →

Posted in Independent source, Ineffective assistance, Inventory, Protective sweep | Comments Off on MA: If arrest invalid, inventory based on it is too

M.D.Fla.: Def was a potential suspect in a series of robberies, and he gave cause for an exigent circumstances into a hotel room after he kicked in the door; plain view sustained

An Hispanic male wearing somewhat distinctive clothing committed four robberies around Tampa. Surveillance video put a vehicle at one of the robberies, and officers found it and surveilled it at a motel parking lot. A couple was around the vehicle … Continue reading →

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Plain view, feel, smell, Protective sweep | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: Def was a potential suspect in a series of robberies, and he gave cause for an exigent circumstances into a hotel room after he kicked in the door; plain view sustained

D.Kan.: Def invited in by homeowners’ daughter without their knowledge had standing

Defendant had standing in the homeowner’s house where he’d been invited in by the daughter and spent the night many times. The protective sweep here was objectively reasonable. United States v. Nelson, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28209 (D.Kan. March 3, … Continue reading →

Posted in Protective sweep, Standing | Comments Off on D.Kan.: Def invited in by homeowners’ daughter without their knowledge had standing

D.Mont.: Govt had insufficient evidence defendant lived at place searched to enter with arrest warrant

The police had insufficient evidence defendant resided at the place searched to justify entry under an arrest warrant. “The government contends that the following facts, in combination, were sufficient to establish probable cause that Doney lived at 108 Buena Vista: … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.Mont.: Govt had insufficient evidence defendant lived at place searched to enter with arrest warrant

CA2: Protective sweep justified in executing arrest warrant for murder suspect

The protective sweep of defendant’s Florida home was justified because he was wanted for murder during a drug trafficking crime. Officers saw pictures of defendant with gang members, and defendant consented to their seizure. United States v. Guerrero, 2016 U.S. … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Informant hearsay, Protective sweep | Comments Off on CA2: Protective sweep justified in executing arrest warrant for murder suspect

S.D.W.Va.: 30 minute delay of stop for drug dog unreasonable

The stop was admittedly justified for a traffic offense, but the officer intentionally delayed ten minutes the writing of the traffic ticket, apparently to give more time for the drug dog to arrive. The dog arrived over thirty minutes into … Continue reading →

Posted in Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on S.D.W.Va.: 30 minute delay of stop for drug dog unreasonable

E.D.Mich.: “I know what you’re looking for, and all I have is a little weed” is reasonable suspicion

Officers in a “semi-marked vehicle” saw defendant on a street corner, and pulled up and stopped and asked him in a conversational tone what he was doing. “Defendant responded that he had just left the liquor store, that he already … Continue reading →

Posted in Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: “I know what you’re looking for, and all I have is a little weed” is reasonable suspicion

D.Minn.: RS and PC as to a car doesn’t require knowing the name of driver

Reasonable suspicion that a vehicle was involved in a crime didn’t require that officers have knowledge of who the driver was. Here, the RS ripened to PC so the length of the stop didn’t matter. The car search was justified … Continue reading →

Posted in Probable cause, Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion, Search incident | Comments Off on D.Minn.: RS and PC as to a car doesn’t require knowing the name of driver