There\u2019s no point in quibbling here over the basis of the traffic stop because the officer had reasonable suspicion of drug trafficking, too. United States v. Mejia-Palacio, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128922 (E.D. Ky. July 25, 2017), adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127851 (E.D. Ky. Aug. 11, 2017).<\/p>\n
Defendant was suspected of dealing in firearms without a license. ATF agents went to his house and talked to him, and he had receipts for 93 guns sold in the previous three years. Four were awaiting pickup at a gun dealer. The seizure of the guns from the gun dealer qualified for plain view because their evidentiary value was immediately apparent. United States v. Kennemer, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132433 (D. Ariz. July 14, 2017),* adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131417 (D. Ariz. Aug. 16, 2017).* [How about just \u201cno standing\u201d because he wasn’t legally entitled to possession yet?]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
There\u2019s no point in quibbling here over the basis of the traffic stop because the officer had reasonable suspicion of drug trafficking, too. United States v. Mejia-Palacio, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128922 (E.D. Ky. July 25, 2017), adopted, 2017 U.S. … Continue reading