S.D.W.Va.: Protective sweep under a bed is reasonable

The protective sweep here looking under the bed was reasonable. It’s where people hide. Defendant’s contention the sweep went further isn’t clear. Some things were moved and opened, but a search warrant had been executed between the sweep and her reentering the house. United States v. Harrell, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 195776 (S.D. W.Va. Oct. 27, 2022).*

A state law violation on the jurisdiction of the officer is irrelevant under the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Nelson, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 195974 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 27, 2022)* (“I agree with Defendant that such a reading of the case law could lead to an absurd result. It cannot be that a local law-enforcement officer can traverse the country and, upon witnessing a potential crime that creates probable cause, stop and search people. But the Eleventh Circuit did not provide a limiting principle in Goings when it applied Moore to the question of jurisdiction, and I am bound by this precedent. Even so, this case is not one that pushes the scope of the rule to the edge.”)

The search of defendant’s backpack was a private search not even observed by the officers. United States v. Ramirez, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 196054 (D. Kan. Oct. 27, 2022).*

This entry was posted in Private search, Protective sweep, Reasonableness. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.