Defendant was indicted for impersonating an officer and flashing a fake badge at a school pickup line. The search warrant for his house for more evidence of that is suppressed. No nexus is ever shown between that offense and his house. United States v. Williams, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 233766 (N.D. Okla. Dec. 30, 2024).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Now compare this: The affidavit for warrant didn\u2019t show any nexus to defendant\u2019s house, except for a passing reference that officers by experience know that drug dealers usually keep drugs or records at home. That was enough for the good faith exception to apply. [So officer\u2019s experience can fill the gap to a belief in probable cause for defendant\u2019s house.] United States v. Willis, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 232921 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 26, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Use of handcuffs during a traffic stop that produced a plain view of a gun wasn\u2019t unreasonable before officers learned defendant was a felon in possession. The suppression order is reversed.
United States v. In, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 32835 (9th Cir. Dec. 30, 2024).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant was indicted for impersonating an officer and flashing a fake badge at a school pickup line. The search warrant for his house for more evidence of that is suppressed. No nexus is ever shown between that offense and his … Continue reading