Under the closely regulated business exception, the State of Maine can require lobsterman to have GPS tracking on their boats. (It\u2019s an important question and the plaintiffs are urged to appeal to the First Circuit.) Thompson v. Keliher, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 211714 (D. Me. Nov. 21, 2024).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defense counsel at trial likely was ineffective in not discovering there was a search warrant for defendant\u2019s phone, but, on this record, it wouldn\u2019t change the result. There\u2019s plenty of evidence to support the conviction besides that. Buford v. State, 2024 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 519 (Nov. 21, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIt is undisputed that the initial seizure of the Vehicle was lawful, so a Fourth Amendment seizure claim based on the Vehicle’s unlawful retention cannot stand. See Shaul, 363 F.3d at 187. Accordingly, summary judgment is granted to Defendants on Santander’s Fourth Amendment claim. But Santander is not without recourse, for the Fourteenth Amendment affords it a \u2018right with respect to a government agency’s retention of lawfully seized property.\u2019 Shaul, 363 F.3d at 187; see also Bennett, 832 F. App’x at 60.\u201d Santander Consumer USA, Inc. v. City of Yonkers, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 211330 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 18, 2024).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Under the closely regulated business exception, the State of Maine can require lobsterman to have GPS tracking on their boats. (It\u2019s an important question and the plaintiffs are urged to appeal to the First Circuit.) Thompson v. Keliher, 2024 U.S. … Continue reading