Test title

Fresh marks and scratches around gas tank and filler near the border was RS. United States v. Estrada, 459 F.3d 627 (5th Cir. August 8, 2006).*

Collective knowledge of officers justified stop because the believed that defendant had purchased a gun as a felon. United States v. Rogers, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 20234 (5th Cir. August 7, 2006)* (unpublished).

MSJ granted defendant’s on collateral estoppel because the issue in the civil case was the same that underlied plaintiff’s indictment and conviction which had been affirmed on appeal by the Third Circuit. Goodrich v. Wilcox, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54291 (M.D. Pa. August 4, 2006).

Rule 41(f)(3) is satisfied by either reading the SW to the occupant or giving them a copy. United States v. Bacon, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54466 (D. Ore. August 3, 2006).

Liquor control officers did not need RS to enter permitted premises; just to open closed cabinets. Loom v. Ohio Liquor Control Comm’n, 2006 Ohio 4072, 2006 Ohio App. LEXIS 3993 (10th Dist. August 8, 2006).*

Defendant was arrested on an arrest warrant and the officers validly conducted a complete inventory, including under the hood. The fact the arrest warrant was not produced at the suppression hearing was not prejudicial where it was put in evidence at the trial. Brooks v. State, 2006 Tex. App. LEXIS 6973 (Tex. App. – Dallas August 8, 2006).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.