CA10: Failure to mention search condition for supervised release at sentencing cured by it being in judgment

At sentencing, defendant was told that the “standard conditions apply,” and being subjected to warrantless searches was not mentioned. It was, however, in the judgment, and that’s notice enough. United States v. Martin, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 22091 (10th Cir. Aug. 30, 2024).*

In plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, he claims a Fourth Amendment violation but doesn’t articulate it. The defense motion does that there wasn’t one, and that one’s granted. Ramirez v. Bd. of Cty. Comm’rs of Sierra Cty., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155867 (D.N.M. Aug. 29, 2024).*

Defendant was pulled over for a traffic stop, and a drug dog was called for. Defendant jumped back in his car and took off, leading police on a high-speed chase for 10-15 minutes. What he tossed from the car was abandoned because fleeing is an independent crime. United States v. Fizer, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 22043 (6th Cir. Aug. 28, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Attenuation, Probation / Parole search, Waiver. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.