Defendant was a sex offender on probation after prison, and he had a search condition. The police and probation had information that he had child pornography on his computer. A probation search of an SD card revealed the child pornography. A suspicionless search was lawful. Even if reasonable suspicion were required, the police had it. United States v. Coffin, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 193246 (D. Me. Nov. 22, 2017).<\/p>\n
Based on a CI, officers suspected that defendants would be doing a heroin deal in a McDonald\u2019s parking lot, and they watched them. \u201cBut, to the Court, law enforcement reasonably assessed this amalgamation of circumstances and reasonably suspected Bernal and Perez of criminal activity. The above facts, in the Court’s view, combine to form a particularized and objective basis for suspecting Defendants of criminality. Thus, Bernal and Perez, driving a vehicle with an Illinois plate, arrived at the exact location at the approximate time that law enforcement anticipated a heroin delivery with those specifics. They lingered, with no obvious explanation, inside the McDonald’s for 45 minutes after concluding their meal, after 10:00 p.m., while Bernal periodically looked out a window to monitor the Element and otherwise sat inside clutching a cell phone.\u201d United States v. Bernal, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 193809 (E.D. Ky. Oct. 26, 2017),* adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 193172 (E.D. Ky. Nov. 22, 2017).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant was a sex offender on probation after prison, and he had a search condition. The police and probation had information that he had child pornography on his computer. A probation search of an SD card revealed the child pornography. … Continue reading