Defendant\u2019s car was stopped for no front license plate, and he was found to be without a valid DL. The car was towed to the 44th Precinct and inventoried, and two cell phones were seized. An officer at another precinct received an alert of defendant\u2019s stop. The other officer had probable cause to believe the phones contained evidence of bank fraud and identity theft, and a search warrant was obtained. The information for the warrants was 10 and 14 months old. \u201cGiven the nature of the conduct alleged, and bearing in mind the substantial deference owed to a magistrate judge’s finding of probable cause, it cannot be said that the gaps in time at issue here rendered the information stale.\u201d United States v. Ward, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 224151 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 19, 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A patrol officer was called by narcs to make a traffic stop \u201cif he could\u201d of defendant, and he did. Mathematical certainty of the traffic offense wasn\u2019t required, only reasonableness, and a reasonable mistake doesn\u2019t make it unreasonable. Looking at the video, the stop was reasonable. In addition, the officer making the call has probable cause on his own for a drug stop. United States v. Bennett, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 224158 (D.Utah Nov. 18, 2021).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant\u2019s car was stopped for no front license plate, and he was found to be without a valid DL. The car was towed to the 44th Precinct and inventoried, and two cell phones were seized. An officer at another precinct … Continue reading