Plaintiff\u2019s strip search was objectively reasonable, no matter the subjective intent that motivated it. Jones v. Degrave, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 10953 (7th Cir. May 6, 2024).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Plaintiff doesn\u2019t show that GPS monitoring as a condition of his state probation was unreasonable. Hamlet v. Irvin, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81233 (W.D. Va. May 3, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The protective sweep was reasonable, and statements made during it are admissible. United States v. Johnson, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 10910 (6th Cir. May 3, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The defense didn\u2019t show that the state destroyed his router during the search of his house such that exculpatory evidence that others were involved instead could have been destroyed. The government showed significant amounts of child pornography on electronics in his house. United States v. Hulse, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 10911 (6th Cir. May 2, 2024).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Plaintiff\u2019s strip search was objectively reasonable, no matter the subjective intent that motivated it. Jones v. Degrave, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 10953 (7th Cir. May 6, 2024). Plaintiff doesn\u2019t show that GPS monitoring as a condition of his state probation … Continue reading