Defendant\u2019s arrest for being a felon in possession justified his search incident. United States v. Westfall, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 217329 (E.D. Mo. Dec. 18, 2019).*<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s detention was without reasonable suspicion and unreasonably extended. A probation officer was working with police officers in a saturation and that led to defendant\u2019s traffic stop in his girlfriend\u2019s driveway, and that led to his immediate handcuffing and detention for more than an hour, and consent to search his cell phone that produced nothing much of interest. State v. Stevens<\/a>, 2019 Del. Super. LEXIS 648 (Dec. 12, 2019).*<\/p>\n Plaintiff\u2019s competing narrative about the force used against him was sufficient to overcome defendants\u2019 claim of qualified immunity. Leonhardt v. City of Akron<\/a>, 2019-Ohio-5223, 2019 Ohio App. LEXIS 5284 (9th Dist. Dec. 18, 2019).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Defendant\u2019s arrest for being a felon in possession justified his search incident. United States v. Westfall, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 217329 (E.D. Mo. Dec. 18, 2019).* Defendant\u2019s detention was without reasonable suspicion and unreasonably extended. A probation officer was working … Continue reading