NC: CI merely located defendant; officers already had PC, so no disclosure of CI’s identity

Officers merely used the CI to locate the defendant, not for the probable cause to search, so no reason to disclose the CI is shown. State v. Heard, 2018 N.C. App. LEXIS 828 (Aug. 24, 2018).

The dash cam video does not support the officer’s testimony that defendant’s car drove on the double yellow line, and the motion to suppress should have been granted. State v. Woods, 2018-Ohio-3352 (9th Dist. Aug. 22, 2018).*

Defendant argued he merely borrowed the car because the owner loaned it to many people, and the USMJ found he lacked standing. The USDJ agrees, but also there was probable cause for the search. United States v. Black, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143704 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 23, 2018).*

This entry was posted in Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion, Standing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.