Defendant\u2019s distancing himself from ownership and control of the vehicle searched by the government \u201ceffectively has eviscerated his ability to challenge the warrantless search of it.\u201d He has no standing to suppress what his wife had. United States v. King, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69697 (W.D. Pa. May 29, 2015) (Treatise \u00a7 4.03 n.14).<\/p>\n
There were no exigent circumstances for an entry. The police were called to a domestic situation about 8:30 pm but didn\u2019t get to the hospital to meet the victim until 10:30 pm. They went to the house about 11:45 pm. She said there was a shotgun in the house. Defendant was removed from the house and questioned. There was probable cause for his arrest. They applied for a search warrant about 3 am. Nothing is suppressed, his statement outside the house was valid, and defendant\u2019s Franks motion fails. United States v. Cooper, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69801 (D. Nev. February 25, 2015).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant\u2019s distancing himself from ownership and control of the vehicle searched by the government \u201ceffectively has eviscerated his ability to challenge the warrantless search of it.\u201d He has no standing to suppress what his wife had. United States v. King, … Continue reading