There was nexus to defendant\u2019s home as a base of operations for drug sales based on circumstantial evidence in the affidavit for warrant. United States v. Pointer, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 35506 (6th Cir. Dec. 20, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The search warrant was not stale. \u201cBut the age of the information alone does not require a court to deny a warrant if \u2018other factors indicate that the information is reliable and that the object of the search will still be on the premises.\u2019 \u2026\u201d United States v. Jones, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 35516 (7th Cir. Dec. 22, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cAfter carefully reviewing the record, we agree with the district court’s determination that the challenged statements and omissions were not necessary to the probable cause finding, and, thus, that Davis’s suppression motion and request for a Franks hearing were properly denied.\u201d United States v. Davis, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 35480 (11th Cir. Dec. 22, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel from counsel not answering questions about the search of defendant\u2019s property, such that the plea offer ran out. The government is ordered to reoffer the 10-year plea agreement. Tingle v. United States, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 230277 (S.D. Ind. Dec. 22, 2022).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant did raise standing, but he just didn\u2019t have standing in the car. United States v. Elburki, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 230294 (W.D. Mo. Dec. 22, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
There was nexus to defendant\u2019s home as a base of operations for drug sales based on circumstantial evidence in the affidavit for warrant. United States v. Pointer, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 35506 (6th Cir. Dec. 20, 2022).* The search warrant … Continue reading