OH4: Entry to recover AR-15 was reasonable, even though it was hard to find

Officers responding to a 911 call were told there was an unsecured AR-15 in the house. The entry to retrieve it was reasonable, and Caniglia v. Strom is distinguishable. State v. Pine, 2023-Ohio-2191, 2023 Ohio App. LEXIS 2166 (4th Dist. June 24, 2023).

“There is thus nothing in Baker’s brief exchange with Brian to suggest that a reasonable person in Almonte-Polanco’s position would have felt coerced to stay as a result of this exchange.” United States v. Almonte-Polanco, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 16445 (2d Cir. June 29, 2023).*

Any delay of the stop here while waiting for the drug dog was caused by the occupants. State v. Bowen, 2023-Ohio-2201 (3d Dist. June 29, 2023).*

Defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim for defense counsel not filing a Franks motion fails because he doesn’t show he’d possibly prevail. United States v. Thompson, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112256 (D. Nev. June 28, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Community caretaking function, Consent, Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.