FL1: Def’s refusal to admit computer searched was his denies him standing

At the suppression hearing, defendant refused to claim ownership of the computer the subject of the motion to suppress. Therefore, he has no standing. Alternatively, the good faith exception saves the search even if there was no probable cause. Bates v. State, 2024 Fla. App. LEXIS 7913 (Fla. 1st DCA Oct. 9, 2024).

“Our supreme court recently held that law enforcement need only have a reasonable suspicion that a person is residing in the place to be searched for officers to execute a warrantless search pursuant to a search waiver. Bailey, 2024 Ark. 87, 687 S.W.3d 819 (declining to apply the probable-cause standard from United States v. Thabit, 56 F.4th 1145 (2023)). The determination is based on the totality of the circumstances. Id. (citing Thompson v. State, 2010 Ark. 294, 377 S.W.3d 207).” Canady v. State, 2024 Ark. App. 478 (Oct. 9, 2024).*

The age of the child allegedly consenting to the search of the home here was irrelevant when it was conducted under a parole search waiver. McClure v. State, 2024 Ark. App. 487 (Oct. 9, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Burden of proof, Computer and cloud searches, Probation / Parole search. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.