{"id":47566,"date":"2021-03-05T11:53:46","date_gmt":"2021-03-05T16:53:46","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=47566"},"modified":"2021-03-05T13:19:41","modified_gmt":"2021-03-05T18:19:41","slug":"ca7-showing-up-for-a-controlled-buy-justifies-automobile-exception-search","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=47566","title":{"rendered":"CA7: Showing up for a controlled buy justifies automobile exception search"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>A prior controlled buy with defendant showing up for another one justifies a vehicle search under the automobile exception. <a href=\"http:\/\/media.ca7.uscourts.gov\/cgi-bin\/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&amp;Path=Y2021\/D03-03\/C:20-1117:J:Brennan:aut:T:fnOp:N:2669662:S:0\">United States v. Smith<\/a>, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 6166 (7th Cir. Mar. 3, 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The trial court credited the officer\u2019s testimony that a computer warrant check on defendant received a positive response. The dashcam audio only confirmed it. The vehicle was searched for inventory before towing. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.supremecourt.ohio.gov\/rod\/docs\/pdf\/5\/2021\/2021-Ohio-569.pdf\">State v. Scofield<\/a>, 2021-Ohio-569, 2021 Ohio App. LEXIS 590 (5th Dist. Mar. 1, 2021).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Defense counsel pursued two motions to suppress in defendant\u2019s case but did not allege lack of particularity. That was treated here as a strategic choice. Moreover, defendant doesn\u2019t even attempt to show that the argument would have prevailed if made. Roy v. United States, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39964 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 2, 2021).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A prior controlled buy with defendant showing up for another one justifies a vehicle search under the automobile exception. United States v. Smith, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 6166 (7th Cir. Mar. 3, 2021). The trial court credited the officer\u2019s testimony &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=47566\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[36,23,39],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-47566","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-automobile-exception","category-ineffective-assistance","category-inventory"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47566","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=47566"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47566\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":47568,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47566\/revisions\/47568"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=47566"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=47566"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=47566"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}