MA: State law requires PC for pole camera surveillance, and officers had it

Pole camera surveillance in Massachusetts requires probable cause to set it up. Officers had it in defendant’s case, and his front door and left side of his house were watched for 15 days. Commonwealth v. Comenzo, 2022 Mass. LEXIS 54 (Feb. 11, 2022).

Defendant was in a car stopped for expired tags. There was a warrant for her arrest. Search of her purse in the car wasn’t valid under Gant as a search incident but it was for inventory and booking because he was arrested. That’s inevitable discovery, but the trial court made no findings of inevitable discovery. Reversed. Wall v. State, 2022 Fla. App. LEXIS 966 (Fla. 5th DCA Feb. 11, 2022).*

There was probable cause for the search warrant here, and, whether or not true, the good faith exception would apply because reliance was reasonable. United States v. Chamberlain, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24664 (E.D.Pa. Feb. 11, 2022).*

This entry was posted in Inevitable discovery, Pole cameras. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.