E.D.Cal.: Just because one officer smelled tobacco in def’s pipe didn’t mean others couldn’t sniff, too

Just because one officer sniffed defendant’s pipe and smelled tobacco, that didn’t mean other officers couldn’t sniff too and come to a different conclusion. United States v. Gearheart, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109593 (E.D. Cal. May 18, 2026).*

The odor of alcohol isn’t enough for a BAC warrant, but here there were more facts. State v. Vonduyke, 2026 Del. Super. LEXIS 215 (May 15, 2026).*

Defendant can’t seek return of property seized in 2019 that he agreed in the plea agreement to forfeit. United States v. Burkhow, 25-3002 (8th Cir. May 19, 2026).*

“Without needing to decide whether the Officers’ conduct constituted a constitutional violation, we conclude below that the law was not clearly established at the time of the Officers’ conduct.” Johnson v. Salter, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 14075 (5th Cir. May 15, 2026),*

This entry was posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion, Rule 41(g) / Return of property. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.