CA4: Def left car door open in traffic stop and that enabled plain view

Defendant’s stop was valid, and he got out of the car leaving the door open. The officer could see the firearm in the car, and that’s plain view. United States v. Bailey, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 20336 (4th Cir. Aug. 13, 2024).*

This iCloud warrant was based on probable cause and was particular and had a specific time limit. “Certain of the categories of evidence authorized for seizure by the February iCloud Warrant may appear overbroad in isolation but are sufficiently particular when considered in context. Unlike the search warrants in the cases cited by Amiri, any facial overbreadth is cured by the preambulatory statement before the list of items to be seized.” United States v. Amiri, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143111 (N.D. Cal. July 26, 2024),* adopted, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144346 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 13, 2024).*

2254 petitioner’s Franks ineffective assistance of counsel claim fails because he never shows that the claim had any chance of success. George v. Rewerts, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142655 (W.D. Mich. Aug. 12, 2024).*

Defendant’s 2255 claim that the search exceeded the scope of the warrant was waived by his guilty plea. United States v. Ledbetter, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142789 (W.D. Okla. Aug. 12, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Computer and cloud searches, Particularity, Plain view, feel, smell, Waiver. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.