CA8: Taking box off FedEx conveyor belt for dog sniff didn’t deprive FedEx of custody

Moving a suspicious looking box from the FedEx conveyor belt to a back room for a dog sniff did not require reasonable suspicion nor did it deprive FedEx of custody of the box. The dog alert provided justification for a search warrant. United States v. Green, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 24129 (8th Cir. Aug. 13, 2021).

The court “hesitantly” concludes there is reasonable suspicion for defendant’s stop. “Detective Anderson made a commonsense judgment, and reached a reasonable suspicion based on probabilities combined with database information sufficient to satisfy the minimal level of objective justification for the traffic stop.” United States v. Cain, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151805 (W.D.Pa. Aug. 12, 2021).*

Defendant should have pled more about his standing in this rented car, but the court gives the benefit of the doubt and schedules a hearing. United States v. Copeland, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151845 (D.Del. Aug. 12, 2021).*

This child pornography warrant wasn’t stale. United States v. Espinoza, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 24125 (8th Cir. Aug. 13, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Dog sniff, Mail and packages, Reasonable suspicion, Seizure, Staleness, Standing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.