E.D.Tenn.: Lack of forensic testing of drug from controlled buy is not a Franks issue

“Lack of scientific corroboration” defendant delivered a controlled substance is not a Franks violation. United States v. Moore, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111382 (E.D. Tenn. June 23, 2022).*

“Here, under the totality of the circumstances, the Court finds that a reasonable person in Defendant’s position would ‘feel free to disregard the police and go about his business.’ Bostick, 501 U.S. at 434. TFO Ruisanchez and TFO Ayala testified that they calmly approached Escobar-Lopez and Ruemmele, identified themselves as officers, asked if they were willing to talk, received affirmative consent, and then proceeded to ask questions for as long as Escobar-Lopez and Ruemmele were willing to engage. … The TFOs did not show force and repeatedly testified that they did not order Defendant to say or do anything. Id. While they asked for identification, ‘that is the type of de minimis intrusion that [the First Circuit has] long agreed to tolerate as a necessary part of policing.’ …” United States v. Escobar-Lopez, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111439 (D.P.R. June 22, 2022).*

The traffic stop was reasonable. And, “Even if the passenger’s flight from the traffic stop did not supply the requisite probable cause for the arrest for obstruction under Georgia law, the officers were objectively reasonable in their belief that it did.” United States v. Green, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111621 (S.D. Ga. June 23, 2022).*

This entry was posted in Consent, Franks doctrine, Reasonableness. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.