\u201cThe Court credits Officer Pompeo’s testimony because he offered a version of events that is not only plausible but also aligns with the respective motivations of law enforcement and Ms. Rodriguez, in light of other, undisputed facts surrounding the events of March 21, 2019.\u201d The officer\u2019s version makes sense; the defense witness\u2019s version is completely implausible that the officer would enter alone and endanger his own safety. United States v. Johnson, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90143 (D. N.J. May 22, 2020).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A state window tint violation (backed up by the officer\u2019s bodycam) justified defendant\u2019s stop. United States v. Davis<\/a>, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 16621 (11th Cir. May 26, 2020).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" \u201cThe Court credits Officer Pompeo’s testimony because he offered a version of events that is not only plausible but also aligns with the respective motivations of law enforcement and Ms. Rodriguez, in light of other, undisputed facts surrounding the events … Continue reading