Defendant was not \u201cseized\u201d just because a police officer got out of a car and walked up to him and his cohorts. The fact nobody moved isn\u2019t a seizure. Then, a plain view of drugs and a gun occurred, and that was justification for a seizure. United States v. Ragin, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71440 (S.D.Fla. May 2, 2016).*<\/p>\n
The court concludes that defendant\u2019s consent was voluntary and rejects his arguments that it was coercive that his family was required to leave pending arrival of a search warrant. The court goes through various facts to find that just not believable that they were being forced out into the cold without shelter. The family\u2019s needs were otherwise accommodated, including moving from a cold room in the house to getting a baby bottle ready for an infant. United States v. Jones, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71181 (W.D.Pa. June 1, 2016).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant was not \u201cseized\u201d just because a police officer got out of a car and walked up to him and his cohorts. The fact nobody moved isn\u2019t a seizure. Then, a plain view of drugs and a gun occurred, and … Continue reading