CA9: Passenger has standing to challenge reasonableness of length of stop

Defendant passenger had standing to challenge the length of the stop because it was his detention, too. There was, however, reasonable suspicion for that. United States v. Alvarez, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 26980 (9th Cir. Oct. 10, 2023).

“Stiff failed to file a motion to suppress in the trial court, resulting in his procedural default of this claim in this habeas proceeding. But even if had raised the issue properly in the state courts, his claim is not cognizable in this proceeding, because it is subject to dismissal under the rule announced in Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465 (1976).” Stiff v. Maarten, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182620 (W.D. Mich. Oct. 11, 2023).*

Probable cause was lacking, but it wasn’t so obvious that the good faith exception should not apply. United States v. Simmons, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182973 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 11, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Good faith exception, Standing, Waiver. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.