Defendant\u2019s motion to suppress admitting no knowledge of the facts is denied as speculative. United States v. Lipman, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158940 (C.D. Cal. Sep. 4, 2024).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cHere, the totality of the circumstances indicates that Agent Oliver had a reasonable suspicion of illegal activity when he conducted the traffic stop of the van. The intersection itself presented evidence of illegal border crossing, namely the frequent fresh footprints just a half mile from the United States-Canada border and the backpack with a price tag in rupees. But location alone did not serve as the basis for Agent Oliver’s suspicion of smuggling.\u201d United States v. Shand, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159443 (D. Minn. Sep. 5, 2024),* adopting 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160581 (D. Minn. July 23, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Even the government doesn\u2019t get a \u201csecond bite at the apple\u201d on a suppression motion by a motion to reconsider. Parties need to make their arguments and then not come up with something for later if they lose. Here it was whether defendant was even seized. United States v. McElroy, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159560 (S.D. Miss. Sep. 5, 2024).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant\u2019s motion to suppress admitting no knowledge of the facts is denied as speculative. United States v. Lipman, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158940 (C.D. Cal. Sep. 4, 2024). \u201cHere, the totality of the circumstances indicates that Agent Oliver had a … Continue reading