A warrant was issued for defendant\u2019s home in California for proof of travel to the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol. Officers found firearms and defendant was a prohibited person because of domestic violence orders. On the firearms warrant, it wasn\u2019t required for the officers to allege they were manufactured outside of California. United States v. Martin, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20680 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 5, 2024).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant couldn\u2019t claim ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal of defense counsel\u2019s failure to move to suppress BAC results. Brunswick Cty. v. McCoy, 2024 N.C. App. LEXIS 71 (Feb. 6, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The fact everybody violates some traffic law at some time doesn\u2019t make a stop invalid under Whren. United States v. Hennings, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20500 (E.D. Mo. Feb. 6, 2024).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A warrant was issued for defendant\u2019s home in California for proof of travel to the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol. Officers found firearms and defendant was a prohibited person because of domestic violence orders. On the firearms warrant, it … Continue reading