Defendant was frisked a second time during execution of a search warrant, and a gun was found. The second frisker didn\u2019t know about the first. There was still reasonable suspicion for a frisk that he was armed and dangerous. United States v. Rollins, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 195547 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 28, 2024).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Window tint was claimed to be pretext for defendant\u2019s stop because the officers never followed up on that. The subjective motives of the officer aren\u2019t to be delved into, and there was otherwise an objective basis for the stop. United States v. Person, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 195118 (D.D.C. Oct. 28, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s statement made during the execution of the search warrant was voluntary. This was not a breach of the door. They knocked and were let in and it wasn\u2019t otherwise confrontational. United States v. Parker, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 195115 (D.D.C. Oct. 28, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This 2255 Fourth Amendment claim is just a slightly different version of the search claim already affirmed on appeal, and this fares no better. United States v. Jefferson, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 195170 (E.D. La. Oct. 28, 2024).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant was frisked a second time during execution of a search warrant, and a gun was found. The second frisker didn\u2019t know about the first. There was still reasonable suspicion for a frisk that he was armed and dangerous. United … Continue reading