N.D.Ind.: The exclusionary rule is not the remedy for a high-speed chase to capture defendant

The exclusionary rule is not the remedy for a high-speed chase to capture defendant. United States v. Tyms, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 204894 (N.D. Ind. Nov. 10, 2022)

Defendant was finally in custody when the police sought to take his DNA, and it is suppressed for lack of warnings. Commonwealth v. Oliver, 2022 Va. App. LEXIS 563 (Nov. 9, 2022).*

Defendant was free to leave the scene of the stop, so it was consensual. Ramsey v. Commonwealth, 2022 Va. App. LEXIS 574 (Nov. 9, 2022).* [The simplicity of this Catch-22 is almost breathtaking: But if he leaves, he abandons the car for search purposes and then has no way home and must walk.]

There were three independent reasons for defendant’s arrest, so the search of his person was valid under any one of them. United States v. Young, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 204693 (D. Minn. Nov. 10, 2022).*

This entry was posted in Consent, DNA, Exclusionary rule. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.