\u201cThough Defendant may have had an \u2018ongoing and meaningful connection to [Zotigh’s] home as a social guest\u2019 at certain times prior to the searches, Zotigh’s termination of their relationship, her refusal to allow Defendant to stay in her mobile home while she was away, and her decision not to give him a permanent key to the mobile home illustrate that Defendant could not claim an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy in Zotigh’s mobile home as a social guest at the time the warrantless searches occurred.\u201d United States v. Bullcoming, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172300 (W.D. Okla. Oct. 3, 2019).<\/p>\n
Officers executing a search warrant seized prescription drugs, but it turned out that plaintiff had valid prescriptions. The officers got summary judgment which is affirmed, essentially without meaningful comment. Jones v. Eder<\/a>, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 29755 (5th Cir. Oct. 2, 2019).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" \u201cThough Defendant may have had an \u2018ongoing and meaningful connection to [Zotigh’s] home as a social guest\u2019 at certain times prior to the searches, Zotigh’s termination of their relationship, her refusal to allow Defendant to stay in her mobile home … Continue reading