N.D.Ohio: 5 yo child wandering in apt parking lot at 2:30 am was exigency when door was open to apt

A five year old boy found wandering at 2:30 am in an apartment building parking lot was exigency for the police to further open defendant’s partially open door when the apartment was found. United States v. Shorter, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94755 (N.D. Ohio May 19, 2021).

Private parties stumbling on child pornography on defendant’s computer weren’t government agents when they turned it over to the police. The police got search warrants. The PC for that was the report of one of the inadvertent private searchers as to what he saw. United States v. Castaneda, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 14839 (11th Cir. May 19, 2021).

Defendant’s second motion to suppress included a claim the CI was under the influence of methamphetamine when he reported to the police so he lacks credibility.” This is a four-corners challenge. “Lee’s statement, newly proffered almost a year after the execution of the search warrant, that he was under the influence of methamphetamine when he was interviewed by federal agents is therefore irrelevant. The search warrant affidavit does not allude to Lee being under the influence of methamphetamine and it is not even established that such information was known to the agents who interviewed him. Further, the Court notes that Lee was lucid enough to provide specific details to the agents, including precise quantities of methamphetamine purchased from a co-defendant and the prices paid thereof.” United States v. Solomon, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94692 (W.D. Tenn. May 19, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Emergency / exigency, Motion to suppress, Private search, Standards of review. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.