D.Nev.: Hot pursuit into house justified by misdemeanor battery on officer

Defendant began his flight as officers got out of their car. They pursued him to an apartment door where he assaulted the first officer with his hands on defendant. That gave justification to enter the apartment in hot pursuit for the misdemeanor battery on an officer. United States v. Chambers, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187893 (D. Nev. November 21, 2012).

There is no Fourth Amendment requirement in child pornography cases for the issuing magistrate to actually see the material to determine probable cause. Four circuits are in accord. United States v. Wilson, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187876 (N.D. Ga. November 28, 2012).*

Defendant was placed in a patrol car because he was arrested, not to thwart veto of consent under Randolph v. Georgia. United States v. Espinoza, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187875 (N.D. Ga. May 8, 2012).*

The frisk was justified during this traffic stop because of excessive nervousness of the driver and passenger. No claim is made that the patdown was too intrusive, and it turned up baggies of meth. United States v. Brooks, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61414 (E.D. Ky. April 30, 2013).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.