A disabled vehicle left parked along a highway is subject to impoundment. Jones v. Woodrow, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 8419 (10th Cir. Apr. 10, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s stop was valid because of a defective LPN light. This led to discovering a lack of insurance, and that properly extended the stop. State v. Mensch, 2025 Iowa App. LEXIS 317 (Apr. 9, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals held that counsel’s failure to research and file a motion to suppress on Fourth Amendment grounds was neither deficient nor prejudicial because, based on the evidence presented at the postconviction hearing, such a motion would not have been successful. \u2026 Harris contends that this conclusion was contrary to, or based on an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law. \u2026 He has failed to meet his burden under \u00a7 2254(d)(1).\u201d Harris v. Boyd, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69647 (M.D. Tenn. Apr. 11, 2025).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A disabled vehicle left parked along a highway is subject to impoundment. Jones v. Woodrow, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 8419 (10th Cir. Apr. 10, 2025).* Defendant\u2019s stop was valid because of a defective LPN light. This led to discovering a … Continue reading