D.Kan.: “Indicia of ownership” in a SW not overbroad

Inclusion of “indicia of ownership” of the place searched doesn’t show the warrant was not particular. United States v. Anderson, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73033 (D. Kan. Apr. 26, 2023).

Defendant was stopped for a traffic violation, although there was reasonable suspicion for drugs as well. That led to a dog sniff. United States v. Fernandez-Silva, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72357 (W.D. La. Apr. 6, 2023).*

The search warrant was issued with probable cause, so the good faith exception issue doesn’t have to be decided. United States v. Diaz-Castrejon, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72444 (N.D. Okla. Apr. 26, 2023).*

Defendant consented to the search of his cell phone while he was in custody. He was at least average intelligence, and he was handcuffed on one arm when talking to the police. United States v. Silva, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72490 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 5, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Consent, Dog sniff, Good faith exception, Particularity. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.