M.D.Tenn.: Harassment of a parolee as reason for exclusion has to come from something other than the alleged const’l violation

Defendant was on supervised release, and he was stopped for a traffic offense. The officer was admittedly courteous, but defendant still claims harassment as a reason to invoke the exclusionary rule. “[T[he Court concludes that if the exclusionary ‘may’ apply when ‘officers were harassing the defendant because of his supervised release status,’ the ‘harassment’ must consist of more than the constitutional violation itself. To find otherwise would equate harassment with any unconstitutional search, which was plainly not the Alexander Court’s intent.” United States v. Robinson, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177422 (M.D.Tenn. Sept. 17, 2021).

Defendant’s abandonment of this car was a waiver of any reasonable expectation of privacy in it. United States v. Mills, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 28143 (4th Cir. Sept. 16, 2021).*