{"id":48885,"date":"2021-06-27T08:13:53","date_gmt":"2021-06-27T13:13:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=48885"},"modified":"2021-06-27T08:13:53","modified_gmt":"2021-06-27T13:13:53","slug":"ca9-order-to-get-out-of-car-permitted-in-mimms-doesnt-unreasonably-extend-stop","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=48885","title":{"rendered":"CA9: Order to get out of car permitted in Mimms<\/em> doesn’t unreasonably extend stop"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

\u201cThe officer’s order to step out of the vehicle and his directive to stand by the patrol car were reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. See Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106, 109-11 (1977) (per curiam). The officer lawfully initiated the traffic stop because Lugo was driving erratically and changed lanes without signaling. After \u2018police ha[d] already lawfully decided that the driver shall be briefly detained\u2019 in a traffic stop, the order to exit the truck was a \u2018de minimis\u2019 intrusion on his liberty justified to ensure officer safety. Id. at 111. Lugo had not pulled over very far onto the shoulder, so the officer standing on the driver’s side of the vehicle faced a \u2018hazard of accidental injury from passing traffic.\u2019 Id.\u201d United States v. Lugo<\/a>, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 18992 (9th Cir. June 25, 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Petitioner sought coram nobis for alleged recent discovery of forged search warrant papers. \u201cThe Petitioner’s claims of newly discovered evidence are unconvincing. The Petitioner’s challenges relate to alleged inconsistencies or deficiencies in various witnesses’ trial testimony and the lack of probable cause in the search warrant affidavit. These do not amount to newly discovered evidence or unknown facts occurring after the Petitioner’s trial had concluded.\u201d Aguilar v. State<\/a>, 2021 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 282 (June 25, 2021).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u201cThe officer’s order to step out of the vehicle and his directive to stand by the patrol car were reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. See Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106, 109-11 (1977) (per curiam). The officer lawfully initiated the … Continue reading →<\/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":[35,63],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-48885","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-reasonable-suspicion","category-reasonableness"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48885","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=48885"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48885\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":48886,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48885\/revisions\/48886"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=48885"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=48885"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=48885"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}