Defendants in two cases showed a REP in a vehicle that they did not own but had permission to drive

A defendant who was not the registered owner of the vehicle searched by the police had standing to challenge its search where he had his own keys, helped pay for it, and could drive it anytime he wanted. He showed a subjective expectation of privacy that society would recognize as reasonable. United States v. Cannon, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84403 (S.D. Ind. April 5, 2006).

A defendant who lived in the same house with the owner of a vehicle who did repair work on it and could drive it at will had standing. United States v. Harms, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84673 (D. Neb. May 2, 2006).

Smell of anhydrous ammonia coming from bed of pickup truck gave officer probable cause to believe that it contained a meth lab. Id.

Flight alone is an insufficient basis for a stop. Flight + hunch ≠ reasonable suspicion. State v. Raphael, 2006 Ohio 6163, 2006 Ohio App. LEXIS 6130 (8th Dist. November 22, 2006).

No law here, but this is typical of meth heads: Defendant and his wife argued over the defendant’s meth lab, which she told him to get out of the house, and the defendant became irate and assaulted her which led to a 911 call and her consent to search for the meth. The search was not even an issue on appeal. Defendant was sentenced to 25 years without parole. State v. Riley, 213 S.W.3d 80 (Mo. App. W.D. November 21, 2006).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.