{"id":52885,"date":"2022-07-29T04:14:13","date_gmt":"2022-07-29T09:14:13","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=52885"},"modified":"2022-07-29T04:14:13","modified_gmt":"2022-07-29T09:14:13","slug":"ca10-arrest-outside-officers-jurisdiction-irrelevant-under-4a","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=52885","title":{"rendered":"CA10: Arrest outside officer&#8217;s jurisdiction irrelevant under 4A"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>Even if the officer arrests plaintiff outside the jurisdiction, state law is irrelevant under the Fourth Amendment. The search incident to the arrest was valid. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ca10.uscourts.gov\/sites\/ca10\/files\/opinions\/010110716333.pdf\">Frey v. Town of Jackson<\/a>, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 20652 (10th Cir. July 26, 2022).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Defendant says he told the officers he put the drugs in the trunk of someone else\u2019s car, but the suppression hearing involved his denial. He doesn\u2019t have standing under Rakas even if he did do that. United States v. Hull, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131690 (E.D. Wash. July 25, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Summary judgment for the defendants in a consent search case was erroneous. There is a question for trial. <a href=\"http:\/\/media.ca7.uscourts.gov\/cgi-bin\/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&amp;Path=Y2022\/D07-26\/C:21-3011:J:Scudder:aut:T:fnOp:N:2908540:S:0\">Jerger v. Blaize<\/a>, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 20539 (7th Cir. July 26, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>A statutory search prohibition for the odor of marijuana was adopted after defendant\u2019s search but before his trial. It didn\u2019t bar the search. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.vacourts.gov\/opinions\/opncavwp\/1095211.pdf\">Montgomery v. Commonwealth<\/a>, 2022 Va. App. LEXIS 317 (July 26, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Even if the officer arrests plaintiff outside the jurisdiction, state law is irrelevant under the Fourth Amendment. The search incident to the arrest was valid. Frey v. Town of Jackson, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 20652 (10th Cir. July 26, 2022). &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=52885\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[63,34],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-52885","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-reasonableness","category-standing"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52885","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=52885"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52885\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":52886,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52885\/revisions\/52886"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=52885"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=52885"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=52885"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}