The government had sufficient justification for a no-knock warrant knowing defendant had three guns in the house. And, even if it didn\u2019t, Michigan v. Hudson shows there\u2019s no suppression remedy. United States v. Dexter, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133497 (D. Minn. June 6, 2022).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Plaintiff\u2019s mere refusal to cooperate with the officers did not constitute obstruction, so there was no probable cause for her arrest. Webster v. Westlake<\/a>, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 20681 (8th Cir. July 27, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n Plaintiffs\u2019 arrest was with at least arguable probable cause, and the officers get qualified immunity. Brown v. City of St. Louis<\/a>, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 20686 (8th Cir. July 27, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n Consent was shown on the video. Defendant was asked multiple times, and he explicitly consented twice, and the second was to make sure there was no miscommunication. United States v. Cedillo, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132496 (E.D. Tenn. July 26, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The government had sufficient justification for a no-knock warrant knowing defendant had three guns in the house. And, even if it didn\u2019t, Michigan v. Hudson shows there\u2019s no suppression remedy. United States v. Dexter, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133497 (D. … Continue reading