D.Conn.: Protective sweep led to seizure of cell phone in plain view

Officers conducted a valid protective sweep and found defendant’s cell phone. It was seized in plain view, and then a search warrant was obtained for it. All searches were valid. United States v. Salaman, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219785 (D.Conn. Nov. 15, 2021).

Defendant didn’t have standing to contest the search of a storage unit without alleging he used it. United States v. Lowe, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219771 (D.Colo. Nov. 15, 2021).

There was no reasonable suspicion for defendant’s stop on the Maine turnpike driving at 10:24 pm. “Here, I conclude that Green’s three de minimis contacts with the inner edge of the fog line (if they occurred at all), with no other indicators of impaired driving or danger to public safety, do not constitute a violation of Maine’s traffic laws sufficient to justify the stop. Viewing the totality of the circumstances through the lens of a reasonable police officer, there was no basis, in fact or in law, to suspect Green of a traffic violation. Because the Government fails to meet its burden of showing a particularized and objective basis for stopping Green’s car, I find that Darcy’s initial stop was not justified by reasonable articulable suspicion and therefore violates the Fourth Amendment.” United States v. Boyd, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220080 (D.Me. Nov. 15, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Cell phones, Plain view, feel, smell, Reasonable suspicion, Standing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.