VI: Routine patdown without reasonable suspicion violated Terry

One defendant’s patdown was unreasonable because it was done without reasonable suspicion as soon as he got out of the car. He was completely cooperative, but subject to a routine patdown. His codefendant doesn’t have standing to challenge the search of his person. People v. Lewis, 2013 V.I. LEXIS 42 (V.I. Super. Ct. June 18, 2013).*

The manager of a motel had authority to consent to search of a storage room where the key was kept at the font desk. United States v. Perez, 522 Fed. Appx. 674 (11th Cir. 2013).*

Defendant was not in custody for Miranda purposes. He was asked for permission to precede at every juncture. He was in a small room at his house, but that was the only private place, and there was no intimidation. United States v. Bohlen, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88992 (D. Neb. June 25, 2013).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.