The distinction between the smell of legal hemp and illegal marijuana wasn\u2019t material where the officer testified he smelled marijuana. United States v. Harris, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164723 (W.D.N.C. Sep. 14, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant was speeding. The stop produced a warrant on him, and that\u2019s inevitable discovery. United States v. Davis, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 24665 (6th Cir. Sep. 15, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Exactly where the truck and trailer were parked on the property as \u201cin front of\u201d a building doesn\u2019t really matter. \u201cGiven these facts, the Court finds that in a \u2018practical and commonsense\u2019 reading of the warrant’s language, the work truck was parked \u2018in front of\u2019 the Premises. Gallegos has not met his burden to demonstrate that the vehicle search went beyond the scope of the warrant.\u201d United States v. Gallegos, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164730 (D.N.M. Sep. 15, 2023).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The distinction between the smell of legal hemp and illegal marijuana wasn\u2019t material where the officer testified he smelled marijuana. United States v. Harris, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164723 (W.D.N.C. Sep. 14, 2023).* Defendant was speeding. The stop produced a … Continue reading