Plaintiff\u2019s claim he was off parole when this parole search occurred at least survives a motion to dismiss. Aurecchione v. Falco, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 171131 (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 25, 2023).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s suppression motion against his residential search warrants was based on results of a wiretap. Since the wiretap was valid, the house warrant was, too. United States v. Glenn, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 170767 (W.D. Pa. Sep. 22, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The court doesn\u2019t have to decide defendant\u2019s standing to challenge the search of this UPS package because there was reasonable suspicion on the totality to pull it out of the distribution chain based on the shipping service purchased, the name not matching the address, and the phone number on the package matching nobody marked on it. United States v. Ali-White, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 170848 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 25, 2023).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Plaintiff\u2019s claim he was off parole when this parole search occurred at least survives a motion to dismiss. Aurecchione v. Falco, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 171131 (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 25, 2023). Defendant\u2019s suppression motion against his residential search warrants was based … Continue reading