WA: One who cohabitates with a probationer can object to search of shared bedroom

Defendant cohabitated with a probationer. He was present and objected to the search of their bedroom, which he had the right to do. What was found was inadmissible against him. State v. Rooney, 2015 Wash. App. LEXIS 2462 (Oct. 13, 2015).

The officer who stopped defendant knew him from a prior drug arrest and defendant’s propensity to be argumentative with police officers. When defendant was pulled over, he and his passenger refused to stay in the car and, once out, refused to keep their hands away from their pockets. This led to a patdown, and drugs were found by plain feel. There was reasonable suspicion for the drug dog that took 25 minutes to show up. United States v. Phommaseng, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139114 (D.Kan. Oct. 12, 2015).*

Defendant was in a car parked in a residential area on a dead end street with his brake lights on but engine off at 3:51 am. Police were called by a neighbor who saw the car. He was in a stupor and couldn’t be awakened until the officer reached in the window and shook him. This was all reasonable. State v. Gormsen, 2015 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 813 (Oct. 6, 2015).*

This entry was posted in Community caretaking function, Probation / Parole search, Stop and frisk. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.