It isn\u2019t apparent that there\u2019s a right to challenge a search warrant before it is executed. (Rule 17 covers motions to quash subpoenas.) Even if there was, defendant doesn\u2019t carry his burden. United States v. Crumpton, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90154 (M.D. Ga. May 23, 2023).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendants were stopped for traffic violations. The officer handled the paperwork and then told them they were \u201cgood to go,\u201d but did the Columbo one-more-thing-before-you-go and asked for consent to search which he got. The consent was valid. On the totality, the court finds the officer also had reasonable suspicion from their demeanor during the stop and obvious nervousness to justify the delay. State v. Samuels, 31 Neb. App. 918 (2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s Franks claim is based on inconsequential differences and is denied. United States v. Ninsawat, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89924 (E.D. Mich. May 23, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cAlthough the Fourth Amendment protects against \u2018unreasonable searches and seizures,\u2019 Plaintiffs failed to cite any case applying this constitutional protection to a state actor who conducts a physical examination of a minor in the State’s custody who has been suspected of being abused.\u201d Therefore, qualified immunity applies. Pethtel v. Tenn. Dep’t of Child.’s Servs., 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 12744 (6th Cir. May 23, 2023).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
It isn\u2019t apparent that there\u2019s a right to challenge a search warrant before it is executed. (Rule 17 covers motions to quash subpoenas.) Even if there was, defendant doesn\u2019t carry his burden. United States v. Crumpton, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS … Continue reading