Disconnected 911 call was basis for knocking on door which opened and officers could step inside

“[A]t 5 A.M. on January 1, 2005, an unidentified ‘very hysterical sounding’ male called the Fort Hall Police Department. The caller screamed something to the effect of ‘[g]et the cops here now’ or ‘[g]et the cops now’ to the residence of Dennis Snipe, Sonny’s father.” The call was disconnected. The police arrived, knocked on the door, and it swung open. They stepped inside and saw drugs and a firearm in plain view. That was the basis for a search warrant, and Brigham City made the entry lawful. United States v. Snipe, 515 F.3d 947 (9th Cir. 2008).

Defendant’s assertions that defense counsel failed to properly present standing in the face of a Carter claim by the government that the presence on the premises was for a criminal enterprise is belied by the record because counsel continually argued standing. No ineffective assistance. Hayden v. United States, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5452 (E.D. Mich. January 25, 2008).*

There was abundant probable cause for the search of defendant’s car here[, the defendant essentially quibbling also over whether the window tint of his car was such that the officer could see inside]. United States v. Faison, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5515 (E.D. Pa. January 25, 2008).*

Officers had cause for stopping defendant because of his speeding and weaving, and his BAC test was justified under Georgia’s implied consent law which was not unconstitutional. Cornwell v. State, 2008 Ga. LEXIS 27 (January 28, 2008).*

Officers were excused from complying with the knock and announce requirement because it was a useless gesture here: Defendant saw them coming and he came out before they knocked. State v. Ramirez, 274 Neb. 873, 745 N.W.2d 214 (2008).