\u201cSet against the obvious reality that a well-documented full and proper inventory was carried out here, I do not find the mere fact that after spotting the gun at the outset, Officer Duran exclaimed, \u2018that was easy,\u2019 and \u2018Now it’s all better,\u2019 demonstrates that the \u2018primary purpose\u2019 of the search was not to do an inventory, as defendant suggests. The Court of Appeals has acknowledged that the \u2018fact that the officers knew that contraband might be recovered does not invalidate the entire search.\u2019 \u2026 In any event, the footage of the officers’ reaction to the discovery of the gun is consistent with an unanticipated discovery, since they immediately \u2014 to this Court’s ear quite spontaneously \u2014 express surprise that there is a second gun, in the car. Duran’s exclamations are readily understood as relief or even glee at having accidentally redeemed himself after allowing an armed individual to get away from him earlier that night. There is no Fourth Amendment principle that forbids a police officer from being pleased at having found an illegal weapon, and I credit Officer Duran’s testimony to that effect, which I find to have been consistent and candid.\u201d People v. Hill, 2022 NY Slip Op 30968(U), 2022 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1544 (Kings Co. Mar. 4, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defense counsel\u2019s failure to pursue a motion to suppress on particularity in addition to probable cause, the only ground raised, was not ineffectiveness because it would not have been granted. Monica v. Myers<\/a>, 319 Ore. App. 376, 2022 Ore. App. LEXIS 702 (Apr. 27, 2922).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" \u201cSet against the obvious reality that a well-documented full and proper inventory was carried out here, I do not find the mere fact that after spotting the gun at the outset, Officer Duran exclaimed, \u2018that was easy,\u2019 and \u2018Now it’s … Continue reading