A BOLO that matched defendant\u2019s car was reasonable suspicion for a stop. United States v. Yanez, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6376 (S.D.Tex. Jan. 12, 2022).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Cell phone communication and text messages about drug deals with the defendant gave probable cause to search his car when he showed up. United States v. Ralston, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6405 (N.D.Ohio Jan. 12, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant was hospitalized after a shooting where an armed concerned citizen shot a robber. In the hospital room, defendant claimed to be a victim. He consented to search for his cell phone and it was in a hospital bag. He consented to that entry into the bag and the rest was plain view, as shown by the bodycam. United States v. Segura, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6334 (S.D.Tex. Jan. 12, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A BOLO that matched defendant\u2019s car was reasonable suspicion for a stop. United States v. Yanez, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6376 (S.D.Tex. Jan. 12, 2022). Cell phone communication and text messages about drug deals with the defendant gave probable cause … Continue reading