Defendant put drugs in bags in the car of a confederate in the crime. When the car was searched, he didn\u2019t have standing, even though he was admittedly the target of the search and not in possession. United States v. Randle, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190591 (N.D. Ind. Oct. 24, 2023).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The plaintiff was charged with dog fighting. After the state court dismissed the criminal case, he sued the city. \u201cWe need not unravel the interplay of issue preclusion, the exclusionary rule, the landlord’s consent, probable cause, and the reasonableness of the searches, because the Monell defense blocks this suit.\u201d Brodanex v. Town of St. John, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 28233 (7th Cir. Oct. 24, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defense counsel foregoing moving to suppress a cell phone that defendant apparently consented to be searched was reasonable. Harvey v. Artis, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190491 (W.D. Mich. Oct. 24, 2023).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant put drugs in bags in the car of a confederate in the crime. When the car was searched, he didn\u2019t have standing, even though he was admittedly the target of the search and not in possession. United States v. … Continue reading