D.Ariz.: No RS for stop, but def fled when tried to be pulled over and that was

Taking the government’s six proffered circumstances which they claim add up to reasonable suspicion, the court finds them lacking on the totality. But, as defendant was being pulled over, he fled, and that made reasonable suspicion. United State v. Shelton, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174069 (D. Ariz. Aug. 7, 2023). [He had no right to refuse contact.]


Defendant was sitting in an idling car outside a drug house. A police car pulled up behind him, and the officer got out. Defendant got out of the car and walked away, and the officer followed asking questions, some of which were answered. Finally, defendant ran away, and officers gave chase. He had a gun on him. The stop was unreasonable. He had a right to not talk to the officers, and fleeing when he did was not even reasonable suspicion. State v. Ivery, 2023-Ohio-3495, 2023 Ohio App. LEXIS 3392 (10th Dist. Sep. 28, 2023). [He had a right to refuse contact.]

None of defense counsel were ineffective for not challenging the search warrants for defendant’s property. “Taking these observations in their totality, combined with evidence of Vasquez’s status as a ‘long-time, successful, drug-trafficker,’ show that there was a nexus between evidence of drug activity and Vasquez’s residence under both the ‘mov[ing] back and forth’ and ‘communications hub’ standards. … Thus, both probable cause and a nexus between evidence of drug activity and Vasquez’s home are found such that the information in the affidavit provided an adequate basis for the Magistrate Judge to issue a warrant.” United States v. Vasquez, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173862 (D. Mass. Sep. 28, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Nexus, Reasonable suspicion, Scope of search. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.