PA: CI tip gave RS for dog sniff during stop

The CI’s tip gave reasonable suspicion to extend the stop for a dog sniff. Commonwealth v. Ortiz, 2024 PA Super 249, 2024 Pa. Super. LEXIS 467 (Oct. 29, 2024).*

“Moreover, as noted above, Trooper Klun’s personal observation of Harris driving above the 25-mph speed limit, is alone, sufficient probable cause to support the initial traffic stop. Accordingly, suppression of the evidence seized during the traffic stop is not warranted.” United States v. Harris, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 195211 (S.D. Ind. Oct. 28, 2024).*

A Transportation Security Officer is an “investigative or law enforcement officer” under Federal Tort Claims Act. 28 U.S.C. § 2680(h). Mengert v. United States, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 27370 (10th Cir. Oct. 29, 2024).*

Failing to tell the USMJ that defendant had three vehicles not just one when probable cause was shown as to the one cited in the warrant wasn’t a Franks violation. United States v. Easter, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 196070 (W.D. Mich. Oct. 29, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.