\u201cThe Court finds there was a fair probability that Defendant was using the cell phone in furtherance of drug trafficking and money laundering and that physical location data for that phone would lead to evidence, fruits, or instrumentalities of those crimes and the identification of involved individuals. Under a totality of the circumstances, the issuing magistrate judge did not err in making a practical, common-sense decision finding probable cause for the original warrant.\u201d United States v. Castro-Valenzuela, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175173 (D. Ariz. Oct. 11, 2018).*<\/p>\n
Defendant objected in a motion to suppress seizure of evidence from his backpack. He didn\u2019t, however, object at trial, and that was waiver of the issue. Stone v. State<\/a>, 2018 Ind. App. LEXIS 362 (Oct. 10, 2018).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" \u201cThe Court finds there was a fair probability that Defendant was using the cell phone in furtherance of drug trafficking and money laundering and that physical location data for that phone would lead to evidence, fruits, or instrumentalities of those … Continue reading