NJ: Alleged third party consenter had no apparent authority

The third-party consent here was invalid because there was no reason to believe they had apparent authority. State v. Marcellus, 2022 N.J. Super. LEXIS 69 (May 18, 2022).

The vehicle safety checkpoint was set up with a valid programmatic purpose, and defendant avoided it and took the police on a high-speed chase. The checkpoint was valid. United States v. Britain, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 13447 (5th Cir. May 18, 2022).*

Officers here got a warrant for a dog sniff of a commercial building’s door seams. United States v. Escudero, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89853 (D.Minn. Mar. 21, 2022).*

There was probable cause for the warrant. “Defendant failed to preserve his challenge to alleged technical defects in the search warrant as the issue was not raised in his omnibus motion or during the suppression hearing.” People v. Gillespie, 2022 NY Slip Op 03279, 2022 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3227 (3d Dept. May 19, 2022).*

This entry was posted in Apparent authority, Dog sniff, Roadblocks, Waiver. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.