Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in two months of pole camera surveillance of his business front door. Society would not recognize a reasonable expectation of privacy of what\u2019s visible from the public street. United States v. Harry, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20312 (D.Conn. Feb. 4, 2022).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s habeas claim is barred by Stone. On the merits, a warrant is not required to examine the recordings of a pole camera, and a pole camera is reasonable. Thomas v. Robinson, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20625 (N.D.Ohio Feb. 4, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A motion to suppress must be filed pretrial or it\u2019s waived. A challenge after conviction is too late. United States v. Peachey, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20448 (D.S.D. Feb. 3, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in two months of pole camera surveillance of his business front door. Society would not recognize a reasonable expectation of privacy of what\u2019s visible from the public street. United States v. Harry, 2022 … Continue reading