Defendant pro se opposed the taking of a new saliva sample. For some reason, the government applied for and obtained a new warrant for saliva having determined that the prior sample was too old or insufficient. The taking of the sample is not stayed. No authority or real argument is provided by the defense. United States v. Soto, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40436 (E.D. N.Y. March 21, 2017).*<\/p>\n
The CI in this case was believable because he made significant admissions against interest in his own methamphetamine dealing. Then, the details were corroborated by independent police work. United States v. Mancilla-Ibarra, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38963 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 25, 2017), adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37802 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 16, 2017).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant pro se opposed the taking of a new saliva sample. For some reason, the government applied for and obtained a new warrant for saliva having determined that the prior sample was too old or insufficient. The taking of the … Continue reading