After completion of traffic stop on a winter day when the driver was sitting in the patrol car, he told the driver he was free to go, but, as he was getting out of the patrol car, the officer asked if he didn’t mind talking some more. He agreed. That led to the officer talking to the others based on RS, and then a valid search. United States v. Coney, 456 F.3d 850 (8th Cir. August 4, 2006).*<\/p>\n
Third party had actual and apparent authority from possession of keys that defendant showed her which went where. United States v. Hinkle, 456 F.3d 836 (8th Cir. August 4, 2006). <\/p>\n
Anticipatory warrant for search after child porn video would be received in defendant’s house was valid. Search for defendant’s computers was not stale even though also based on 1999 information that was resurrected by defendant’s 2003 interest in child porn by video. The fact the defendant did not fall for a 2000 sting did not become some superceding event. United States v. King, 191 Fed. Appx. 153 (3d Cir. August 3, 2006) (unpublished).*<\/p>\n
Disclaiming ownership in a briefcase found during an allegedly unlawful inventory means no standing. United States v. Decoud, 456 F.3d 996 (9th Cir. August 2, 2006).*<\/p>\n
A probation officer can rely on statements from LEOs in ordering a probation search. It is nowhere required that the probation officer has to hear it directly. United States v. Monzulla, 195 Fed. Appx. 629 (9th Cir. August 1, 2006) (unpublished).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading