D.R.I.: Motion in limine about SW is denied; govt can refer to search in trial

Defendant’s motion in limine about whether a search warrant was utilized is denied. The government can refer incidentally to the search. United States v. Djan, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8285 (D.R.I. Jan. 10, 2025).

Officers had reasonable suspicion for the stop and continuation of it, and his actions toward his jacket gave them probable cause to believe there was something in it. United States v. Peake-Wright, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 1043 (6th Cir. Jan. 16, 2025).*

Defendant didn’t have standing to challenge the search of cell phones found on the premises that were not his. United States v. Dirksmeyer, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8423 (D. Minn. Jan. 16, 2025).*

“With or without this [Franks challenged] statement, the affidavit still contains a sufficient basis to find probable cause. For the same reasons, Neves’ assertion that the affidavit lacked an independent basis of knowledge for the accusation fails.” United States v. Neves, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8377 (D. Me. Jan. 16, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Admissibility of evidence, Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion, Standing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.