CA2: Subsequent officer’s entry into protective sweep wasn’t unreasonable; it was considered part of the first

The protective sweep of defendant’s garage which led to an observation that made it into the warrant application was reasonable. A later entry into the garage by another officer wasn’t unreasonable. It mimicked the first. United States v. Constantinescu, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 20686 (2d Cir. Aug. 14, 2025).

The state showed probable cause for defendant’s CSLI. State v. Evans, 2025 Conn. LEXIS 177 (Aug. 12, 2025).*

The 4-5 minute protective sweep was reasonable and justified by the facts. United States v. Francisco-Tomas, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156257 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 13, 2025).*

A game warden stopped defendant’s vehicle for suspicion of littering, and the smell of marijuana justified more. The FSTs, however, weren’t authorized by a game warden, so that part is suppressed. State v. Phelan, 2025 Wisc. App. LEXIS 735 (Aug. 14, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Cell site location information, Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.