Officers obtained a search warrant for counterfeiting and theft and they seized a locked black box from defendant’s house. They later learned that a gun might be in the box, so they retrieved it from the evidence room and forced it open. That search was unlawful because the police needed a warrant. United States v. Ferry, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69349 (D. Utah September 25, 2006).<\/p>\n
Seizure of laptop stated by witnesses to be involved in counterfeiting was seizable because it was forfeitable. A search warrant was later obtained to get into it. United States v. Dorr, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69161 (W.D. Pa. September 26, 2006).*<\/p>\n
Suit over search that led to conviction was barred by Heck<\/em> because it necessarily implicates the validity of the finding of the drugs and that was the basis for the conviction. Zimmerman v. Chadbourne, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69207 (D. Colo. September 26, 2006).*<\/p>\n Defendant argued his flight in a high crime area from an unmarked black car was not reasonable suspicion, but the district court disagreed. United States v. Afonso, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69282 (D. Mass. September 26, 2006).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" b2evGMco.b2evALnk.b2WPAutP.b2evSmil Continue reading