The officer knew a week earlier that defendant\u2019s LPN was expired. He saw defendant and called it in without looking, and it came back expired. That was still probable cause and justification for a stop, and looking again wasn\u2019t required. Defendant fled from the stop on foot and discarded stuff. It could be seized. United States v. Baker, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 214240 (E.D. Tex. Nov. 26, 2019).*<\/p>\n
Defendant looked enough like the person running away from the scene of the crime for there to be probable cause. Running away from gunshots is also innocent behavior but \u201che had a tattoo on his face near his eye, eyebrow slits, wore dark clothing, and matched the described race and gender\u201d which [apparently] was on the video. There also was no Franks violation: \u201cEven if these [omitted] facts had been brought to the attention of the magistrate judge, there remains ample probable cause to support the challenged warrants, as discussed above.\u201d United States v. Powell, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 214465 (S.D. N.Y. Dec. 12, 2019).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The officer knew a week earlier that defendant\u2019s LPN was expired. He saw defendant and called it in without looking, and it came back expired. That was still probable cause and justification for a stop, and looking again wasn\u2019t required. … Continue reading