Daily Archives: January 27, 2026

VA: Exclusionary rule does not apply in animal cruelty forfeitures

The exclusionary rule does not apply in animal cruelty forfeitures, distinguishing One 1958 Plymouth Sedan v. Pennsylvania. Mogensen v. Cty. of Rockbridge, 2026 Va. App. LEXIS 46 (Jan. 27, 2026). Defendant’s stop for a broken taillight lacked reasonable suspicion because … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on VA: Exclusionary rule does not apply in animal cruelty forfeitures

D.Minn.: The stated reason for the stop was pretextual, but it was with PC

There was probable cause for the stop and search of defendant’s car before the pretextual stop. Therefore, it was all valid. United States v. Nieves, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 272309 (D. Minn. Dec. 1, 2025).* Defendant’s stop was with reasonable … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Consent, Plain view, feel, smell, Pretext, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.Minn.: The stated reason for the stop was pretextual, but it was with PC