Here, the government got a search warrant for information from Google over who placed a Google voice call. United States v. Alford, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219552 (N.D. Fla. Nov. 8, 2022),* adopted, CoA denied, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218090 (N.D. Fla. Dec. 3, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s specific violation of privacy challenge by the state changed between the trial court and the appeal, and it would not be considered. State v. Rogers, 2022-NCCOA-828, 2022 N.C. App. LEXIS 810 (Dec. 6, 2022) (unpublished).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant litigated his search claim in state court and appealed. He can\u2019t revise the issue and raise it again as in habeas when he already had the \u201cfull and fair opportunity\u201d to litigate it. United States v. Bennett, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218932 (D. Mont. Dec. 5, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The search of defendant\u2019s car was without his consent, but, based on the suppression hearing testimony, valid as an inventory. United States v. Thompson, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218936 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 5, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Here, the government got a search warrant for information from Google over who placed a Google voice call. United States v. Alford, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219552 (N.D. Fla. Nov. 8, 2022),* adopted, CoA denied, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218090 … Continue reading