W.D.Pa.: Protective sweep of house was reasonable despite def’s arrest outside

The officers had knowledge defendant had confederates in his drug operation. While he was arrested outside his house, a protective sweep inside was still shown to be reasonable. United States v. Pope, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 209740 (W.D. Pa. Nov. 19, 2024).

Running an LPN is not an illegal search. Also, lack of insurance doesn’t have to be confirmed to be probable cause. White v. State, 2024 Ark. App. 572 (Nov. 20, 2024).*

The defense actually filed a motion to suppress: “In this case, Ptlm. Kassing observed a vehicle that did not have an operable license plate light while on routine patrol. He followed the vehicle to initiate a traffic stop. In response, the driver failed to stop after the emergency lights were activated, traveled in excess of the speed limit, threw evidence out of the window, failed to stop at three stop signs, and fled from the vehicle while it was still moving. Kassing had not only a reasonable and articulable suspicion that a traffic violation had been committed by an unknown person in the vehicle but also probable cause that multiple traffic violations had been committed by the driver. After Nabors’ flight from the Fusion, Ptlm. Kassing secured the black sock that was tossed out the window during the chase and other officers secured the abandoned vehicle.” Denied. United States v. Nabors, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 210244 (E.D. Mo. Oct. 23, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Abandonment, Protective sweep, Reasonable expectation of privacy. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.