A Facebook post of a dead bird taken in violation of the Migratory Bird Act is itself probable cause of a violation of the Act. The only question then is the place to be searched, and it\u2019s logical for a warrant to issue to search defendant\u2019s house. Wildlife officers investigated, tracked down defendant\u2019s address, and then got the warrant. There also was no justification for a Franks hearing. United States v. Acevedo-Hernandez, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45391 (D.Nev. January 7, 2015), adopted 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73189 (D.Nev. June 5, 2015).<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s detention for about an hour waiting for a drug dog was reasonable based on the totality of circumstances. They were staying at a tribal casino hotel, and housekeeping found a baggie of meth on the pillow in their room. Casino security was informed. Because they weren\u2019t tribal members, the local sheriff was called who came with a drug dog, and their car on the parking lot was subjected to a sniff that was positive. This was all based on more than just reasonable suspicion. United States v. Simeon, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45011 (N.D. Iowa April 7, 2015).*<\/p>\n
The officer had reasonable suspicion to detain defendant for the slight duration. When he asked defendant about the suitcase he saw somebody put in the backseat of defendant\u2019s car, he asked if he could search it, and defendant agreed: \u201cNo, I don\u2019t care. Go ahead. I told you it’s not mine.\u201d The conversation during the detention was not an arrest, so Miranda didn\u2019t apply. United States v. Nuckles, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45406 (N.D.Ga. April 6, 2015).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A Facebook post of a dead bird taken in violation of the Migratory Bird Act is itself probable cause of a violation of the Act. The only question then is the place to be searched, and it\u2019s logical for a … Continue reading