CA8: Drugs on person admissible under 404(b) despite being outside indictment

Drugs on defendant’s person at the time of arrest were admissible under 404(b) despite being outside the time of the indictment. United States v. Hodo, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 1796 (8th Cir. Jan. 28, 2025).

Defendant was on supervised release and the search of his cell phone producing child pornography was reasonable. United States v. Shove, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13428 (D. Nev. Jan. 27, 2025).*

Identification by a single eyewitness is sufficient to establish probable cause for an arrest. There was no reason to doubt the reliability of the identification in this case. The existence of an arrest warrant and grand jury indictment created presumptions of probable cause that defendant failed to rebut. Lee v. Harris, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 1668 (7th Cir. Jan. 27, 2025).*

Speculative statements about a potential Franks violation doesn’t support a 2255. United States v. Fisher, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13662 (D. Nev. Jan. 24, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Admissibility of evidence, Franks doctrine, Probable cause, Probation / Parole search. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.