Defendant was stopped ostensibly for a traffic violation, and he was handcuffed and the officers literally did nothing to investigate that\u2013they didn\u2019t even ask for his license and registration. Despite the fact Whren says pretext doesn\u2019t matter, that lack of action shows that the officers did not pursue the traffic offense and it became unreasonable. Real time CSLI was used to track him, but the government failed to show how or why. \u201cBy failing to provide this information, the Government failed to meet its burden to show that there was no reasonable expectation of privacy specifically in the data it searched.\u201d United States v. Broderick, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13710 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 25, 2024).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s Franks challenge fails. The parties stipulated that the officer could provide a supplemental affidavit explaining, and he said that what was omitted wasn\u2019t material to anything underlying the probable cause, and the court of appeals agrees. Frankson v. State, 2024 Alas. App. LEXIS 8 (Jan. 24, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Officers saw defendant stuffing what apparently were drugs into a bag, and that justified a search incident of the bag. United States v. Davis, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 1741 (4th Cir. Jan. 25, 2024).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant was stopped ostensibly for a traffic violation, and he was handcuffed and the officers literally did nothing to investigate that\u2013they didn\u2019t even ask for his license and registration. Despite the fact Whren says pretext doesn\u2019t matter, that lack of … Continue reading