OH6: Trial court’s failure to explain RS under Rodriguez required remand

The trial court in denying the motion to suppress didn’t adequately explain the Rodriguez moment and whether there was reasonable suspicion. Remanded. State v. Jeter, 2024-Ohio-1442, 2024 Ohio App. LEXIS 1356 (6th Dist. Apr. 12, 2024).

On the totality of circumstances, the video showed defendant consented to the search of his car. He was lucid and acted like he knew what he was doing. He was 25 years old and a high school graduate. United States v. Nixon, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68922 (N.D. Ind. Apr. 16, 2024).*

In the attempt to unseal the Project Veritas search warrant, the court affirms the USMJ’s R&R that unsealing the affidavit for the warrant would reveal the government’s legal theories and witnesses while the investigation is still going on. Therefore, the affidavit will not be unsealed. In re Search Warrant Dated November 5, 2021, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68998 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 16, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Consent, Reasonable suspicion, Warrant papers. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.