The court assumes without deciding that defendant had standing to challenge the search of his sister’s house because, although he was kicked out because of an arrest warrant for him, she let him back in to take a shower, charge his phone, gather his belongings, and call for a ride. She consented to the search. Once inside, the defendant\u2019s cell phone was in plain view, and the officers were looking for it because they suspected it had information about defendant being in an armed robbery on it. United States v. Gillom, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51375 (D. Kan. April 4, 2017).*<\/p>\n
A prison medical provider\u2019s allegedly negligent care is not a Fourth Amendment claim. Amey v. Cal. Med. Corr. Health Care Servs., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50799 (E.D. Cal. March 31, 2017).*<\/p>\n
Defendant was stopped for improper lane usage and an obstructive LPN. Literally within seconds, reasonable suspicion was developing based on where the defendant was coming and going based on his familiarity with the area he\u2019d worked in so long. United States v. Newton, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50916 (S.D. Ala. April 4, 2017).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The court assumes without deciding that defendant had standing to challenge the search of his sister’s house because, although he was kicked out because of an arrest warrant for him, she let him back in to take a shower, charge … Continue reading