Defendant was not an overnight guest and was a casual visitor to the premises who lacked standing [heavily relying on a pre-Carter case of mine from 1985 where there was no standing]. United States v. Quigley, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 200865 (D.S.D. Nov. 7, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The plain view of a plastic container of marijuana in defendant\u2019s car was reasonable. Defendant seeks a different inadvertence requirement under the state constitution but doesn\u2019t say how or why it should be found. In any event, even if it existed, it wouldn\u2019t help him here. State v. Lane, 2023-Ohio-4044 (1st Dist. Nov. 8, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The trial court\u2019s order stated that this juvenile\u2019s consent to taking his DNA was involuntary. He had been previously involved in violent interactions with the police and his mother was coercing him too. In re J.G., 2023-Ohio-4042 (1st Dist. Nov. 8, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Whether there was effective consent doesn\u2019t matter where there was reasonable suspicion for the detention. State v. Barone, 2023 Fla. App. LEXIS 7675 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 8, 2023).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant was not an overnight guest and was a casual visitor to the premises who lacked standing [heavily relying on a pre-Carter case of mine from 1985 where there was no standing]. United States v. Quigley, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS … Continue reading