TX12: When passenger was ordered out of car and “couldn’t open” door, officer could

During a traffic stop, an object hanging inside the passenger door concerned the officer. The passenger claimed the door wouldn’t open from inside, so it was reasonable for the officer to open the door when ordering the passenger out. Penney v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 9449 (Tex. App. – Tyler Dec. 10, 2025).

The consenter knew she had a right to insist on a search warrant because she even mentioned it when asked about consent. She later consented. United States v. Hawthorne, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 256470 (E.D. Wis. Dec. 11, 2025).

Defendant gets return of his iPhone after post-conviction time has run, but it’s returned to factory settings because there was potential CSAM on it. United States v. Kindley, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 256353 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 8, 2025). (full disclosure, the blogger here represented him in the cited Arkansas case).

This entry was posted in Consent, Reasonable suspicion, Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Search. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.