The court can\u2019t determine from the record whether defendant\u2019s actions in his hotel room justified the hotel locking him out and seizing the room, so the court goes to an alternative argument: The rental period expired at 11 am with no renewal and his stuff was still there. This was valid as a private search. United States v. Barnes, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152650 (E.D. Mich. Sep. 7, 2018).*<\/p>\n
Plaintiff stated a claim for relief for the police entering his house to seize him for alleged child endangerment without probable cause. Maric v. Alvarado<\/a>, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 25344 (9th Cir. Sep. 6, 2018).*<\/p>\n Remanded for an evidentiary hearing on whether defendant consented to an evidentiary blood test. State v. Edelman, 2018 VT 100, 2018 Vt. LEXIS 136 (Sep. 7, 2018).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The court can\u2019t determine from the record whether defendant\u2019s actions in his hotel room justified the hotel locking him out and seizing the room, so the court goes to an alternative argument: The rental period expired at 11 am with … Continue reading