Five pole cameras were trained on defendant\u2019s house. A \u201cnetwork of pole cameras\u201d isn\u2019t a Fourth Amendment violation. See United States v. Tuggle, 4 F.4th 505 (7th Cir. 2021). Moreover, he does not rebut the presumption of good faith with his argument with no citation of authority. United States v. Carrazco-Martinez, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24849 (N.D.Ill. Feb. 11, 2022):<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Carrazco-Martinez fails to provide evidence to rebut the presumption of good faith. In his reply brief, he argues that “this Court should see through the government’s argument that its good faith precludes the Court from applying the exclusionary rule.” Yet, he cites to no authority in support of this proposition, nor does he expound upon the assertion any further.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Five pole cameras were trained on defendant\u2019s house. A \u201cnetwork of pole cameras\u201d isn\u2019t a Fourth Amendment violation. See United States v. Tuggle, 4 F.4th 505 (7th Cir. 2021). Moreover, he does not rebut the presumption of good faith with … Continue reading