D.Kan.: “The opening of the driver’s door had no effect or impact on the dog’s alert.”

“The opening of the driver’s door had no effect or impact on the dog’s alert.” United States v. Anderson, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73033 (D. Kan. Apr. 26, 2023).

The facts in the record support the automobile exception as the basis for the search, so probation search does not need to be decided. United States v. Carson, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 9946 (6th Cir. Apr. 24, 2023).*

The affidavit for the warrant showed probable cause, and, even if it didn’t, the good faith exception would apply. United States v. Novacheck, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71630 (D. Minn. Mar. 1, 2023).*

There was cause for the stop that ripened into probable cause, and defendant’s parole condition permitted a search, too. United States v. Virrueta, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71829 (D.S.D. Mar. 10, 2023),* adopted 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71830 (D.S.D. Apr. 13, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Automobile exception, Dog sniff, Good faith exception, Probation / Parole search. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.