Defendants moved for return of their property after conviction and the appeal was affirmed. The government gets to keep it pending conclusion of any collateral review which might be filed. United States v. Banks, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107994 (D.Colo. August 17, 2015).<\/p>\n
Defendant gave a statement which showed he lived elsewhere and disclaimed any connection with the place searched. He lacked standing. Given a \u201csecond bite at the apple\u201d to produce evidence to show standing, he didn\u2019t. Besides, he\u2019d lose on the merits anyway. United States v. Taylor, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109197 (N.D.Ind. August 19, 2015).*<\/p>\n
A neighbor of a liquor store complained of drug sales occurring outside of it after hours. Police set up surveillance across the street to watch, and they saw apparent drug deals. On the totality of circumstances, defendant\u2019s conduct was at least reasonable suspicion to engage in a stop and frisk. State v. Starks<\/a>, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 817 (August 18, 2015).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Defendants moved for return of their property after conviction and the appeal was affirmed. The government gets to keep it pending conclusion of any collateral review which might be filed. United States v. Banks, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107994 (D.Colo. … Continue reading