Defendant was accosted as he was getting on a Greyhound bus in Detroit and blocked from getting on the bus and asked to produce his ID, ticket, and cell phone. He said he didn\u2019t have his ID and gave the wrong information. Still, the encounter was without reasonable suspicion and it is suppressed. His consent to a patdown, even if valid, was exceeded. United States v. Woods-Gibby, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23941 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 13, 2023).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This anticipatory warrant was issued with probable cause and a requirement that it not be executed until the package was opened, revealed by electronic sensor. United States v. Ordo\u00f1ez, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24588 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 14, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Purple lights on the center front of defendant\u2019s motorcycle justified his stop. Lehman v. State, 2023 Ind. App. LEXIS 49 (Feb. 13, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Consent to view photos on defendant\u2019s phone granted before the police interview that extended past the interview was still valid. United States v. Garcia, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24964 (D. Ariz. Feb. 14, 2023).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant was accosted as he was getting on a Greyhound bus in Detroit and blocked from getting on the bus and asked to produce his ID, ticket, and cell phone. He said he didn\u2019t have his ID and gave the … Continue reading