Defendant in his car in a high crime area with overly tinted windows was not reasonable suspicion. Any furtive movements were attributed to the officer opening the door to see in the car for officer safety. The protective sweep of the car was unreasonable. Citing a 1990 state case, the good faith exception doesn\u2019t apply to reasonable suspicion. State v. Williams, 2024 Ohio App. LEXIS 1009 (1st Dist. Mar. 22, 2024).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s arrest for domestic violence was with probable cause so the trial court is reversed. State v. Gipp, 2024-Ohio-1076 (2d Dist. Mar. 22, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The affidavit for warrant here showed probable cause to believe defendant was involved in a large-scale drug operation, and nexus was shown to his home. \u201cFinally, Tatum’s motion does not contend that the agents and officers executing the search warrant lacked a good faith reliance on the warrant. But even assuming arguendo that the affidavit was somehow lacking, the officers executing the search warrant were acting in reasonable and good faith reliance on it.\u201d United States v. Tatum, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51432 (E.D. Mo. Feb. 26, 2024).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant in his car in a high crime area with overly tinted windows was not reasonable suspicion. Any furtive movements were attributed to the officer opening the door to see in the car for officer safety. The protective sweep of … Continue reading