Defendant\u2019s stop in the recheck line at JFK shortly after clearing customs was still within the border search area. United States v. Newton, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 195145 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 8, 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Reversed yet again for lack of proper findings whether defendant was seized at the time of his patdown that found cocaine. \u201cThe trial court focused its findings on whether it was reasonable to seize Maye and whether Maye voluntarily consented to a search regardless of whether he was seized. But it never focused on the related and we think dispositive question of whether Maye was seized at the moment of his purported consent. For instance, while the court stressed that Ronald Hall\u2014Maye’s friend at the scene\u2014testified to facts that \u2018did not materially contradict the officers’ testimony,\u2019 his testimony did diverge from the officers’ in respects critical to assessing when Maye was seized. Because further factual findings are potentially dispositive as to whether Maye was seized when he agreed to be searched, we remand the case for further findings.\u201d Maye v. United States<\/a>, 2021 D.C. App. LEXIS 286 (Oct. 7, 2021).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Defendant\u2019s stop in the recheck line at JFK shortly after clearing customs was still within the border search area. United States v. Newton, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 195145 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 8, 2021). Reversed yet again for lack of proper findings … Continue reading