{"id":53732,"date":"2022-12-09T08:20:08","date_gmt":"2022-12-09T13:20:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=53732"},"modified":"2022-12-10T08:35:37","modified_gmt":"2022-12-10T13:35:37","slug":"oh1-failure-to-follow-probation-search-statute-doesnt-require-exclusion","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=53732","title":{"rendered":"OH1: Failure to follow probation search statute doesn&#8217;t require exclusion"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>Defendant\u2019s argument that the probation search statute wasn\u2019t followed doesn\u2019t require exclusion. That\u2019s for constitutional violations. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.ohio.gov\/rod\/docs\/pdf\/1\/2022\/2022-Ohio-4300.pdf\">State v. Clardy<\/a>, 2022-Ohio-4300, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 4070 (1st Dist. Dec. 2, 2022); State v. Kellett, 2022-Ohio-4340, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 4088 (5th Dist. Dec. 5, 2022).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Defendant allegedly stole a computer from his former employer and tried to sell it on eBay. They reported it to the police who got a search warrant for defendant\u2019s place. A representative of the employer was there for the search and identified their computer open on the bed. The officer touched the mousepad and child porn came up. The computer was seized and more child pornography was found. The plea was unconditional, so he couldn\u2019t appeal. United States v. Powell, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 33275 (6th Cir. Nov. 30, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Defendant\u2019s argument that the officer\u2019s testimony didn\u2019t add up to reasonable suspicion is based on a credibility argument. There was reasonable suspicion on the totality. United States v. Pierre, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 217512 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 21, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Defendant\u2019s argument that the probation search statute wasn\u2019t followed doesn\u2019t require exclusion. That\u2019s for constitutional violations. State v. Clardy, 2022-Ohio-4300, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 4070 (1st Dist. Dec. 2, 2022); State v. Kellett, 2022-Ohio-4340, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS 4088 (5th &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=53732\">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":[14,58,35,129],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-53732","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-exclusionary-rule","category-probationparole-search","category-reasonable-suspicion","category-waiver"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/53732","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=53732"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/53732\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":53740,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/53732\/revisions\/53740"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=53732"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=53732"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=53732"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}