D.Mont.: Reliable informant’s report defendant had a gun wasn’t RS because this is an open carry state

Defendant’s motion to suppress is granted on the exhibits and briefs without a hearing because there was no reasonable suspicion for the stop. “However, the information provided by the caller was insufficient on its own for the police to have reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop. Based on the content of the call, the officers knew that Glenn was in possession of a gun. Openly carrying firearms and carrying concealed firearms are presumptively legal in Montana.” Nothing else supports reasonable suspicion. United States v. Glenn, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91171 (D. Mont. May 20, 2024).

Defendant’s completely hearsay statement that T-Mobile said it didn’t service his cell phone account doesn’t overcome the affidavit saying that they did. [Whether they did or not, what of it?] United States v. Diaz, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91129 (S.D.N.Y. May 20, 2024).*

The USMJ’s R&R on the Franks question is free of clear error. United States v. Ji Wang, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91119 (W.D.N.Y. May 21, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Franks doctrine. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.