D.N.M.: Conflict of laws: Does the law of the circuit of the search apply or where the court sits?

Conflict of laws: The search was in the Ninth Circuit but the court sits in the Tenth. Which version of the independent source doctrine applies? As interesting as that question is, despite differences, it doesn’t actually matter here, because it does. United States v. Haack, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95623 (D.N.M. May 29, 2024), recon. den. 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108291 (D.N.M. June 18, 2024).

“Trooper Winters’ bodycam footage and heard the testimony of Trooper Winters, which it finds credible, and concludes it was more than reasonable for Trooper Winters to believe Perez adequately spoke English and, further, that Perez consented to the search of his Vehicle.” United States v. Perez, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95027 (D. Neb. May 29, 2024).*

Defendant’s being unable to be awakened in a car justified opening the door. Rogers v. State, 2024 Ark. App. 340 (May 29, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Community caretaking function, Consent, Inevitable discovery. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.