Plain view: \u201cIn the case before us, the evidence showed that it was immediately apparent to Officer Yanez, i.e., he had probable cause to believe, that the white pills in the blue-tinted, knotted baggie were illegal narcotics based on his narcotics training and over 100 narcotics arrest during his six-year career. He specifically testified: \u2018From my experience, the way I have seen narcotics packaged, I believe[d] it to be narcotics.\u2019\u201d People v. Mallett, 2023 IL App (1st) 220920 (Sep. 26, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cUltimately, Officer Roach observed specific behavior that, taken together, gave him a particularized and objective basis to suspect that criminal activity was afoot. Viewing those collective observations in light of Officer Roach’s professional experience\u2014as we must\u2014it was reasonable for Officer Roach to seize the occupants of the vehicle for a short time longer to conduct the minimally intrusive investigatory dog sniff. Thus, we conclude that the totality of the circumstances\u2014the whole picture\u2014provided reasonable suspicion to prolong the traffic stop to conduct the dog sniff.\u201d Canonge v. State, 2023 Ind. App. LEXIS 267 (Sep. 25, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cFurther, the law that the disproportionate use of force against a non-resisting suspect is excessive was clearly established by the time of Plaintiff’s arrest in April 2019.\u201d Neira v. Gualtieri, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 171162 (M.D. Fla. Sep. 26, 2023).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Plain view: \u201cIn the case before us, the evidence showed that it was immediately apparent to Officer Yanez, i.e., he had probable cause to believe, that the white pills in the blue-tinted, knotted baggie were illegal narcotics based on his … Continue reading