N.D.Cal.: Failure to pursue alleged traffic violation made stop unreasonable

Defendant was stopped ostensibly for a traffic violation, and he was handcuffed and the officers literally did nothing to investigate that–they didn’t even ask for his license and registration. Despite the fact Whren says pretext doesn’t matter, that lack of action shows that the officers did not pursue the traffic offense and it became unreasonable. Real time CSLI was used to track him, but the government failed to show how or why. “By failing to provide this information, the Government failed to meet its burden to show that there was no reasonable expectation of privacy specifically in the data it searched.” United States v. Broderick, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13710 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 25, 2024).

Defendant’s Franks challenge fails. The parties stipulated that the officer could provide a supplemental affidavit explaining, and he said that what was omitted wasn’t material to anything underlying the probable cause, and the court of appeals agrees. Frankson v. State, 2024 Alas. App. LEXIS 8 (Jan. 24, 2024).*

Officers saw defendant stuffing what apparently were drugs into a bag, and that justified a search incident of the bag. United States v. Davis, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 1741 (4th Cir. Jan. 25, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion, Search incident. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.