Despite there being backup at the scene, the protective sweep here is valid. United States v. Antley, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78961 (D.R.I. Apr. 25, 2025).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The controlled buy gave probable cause for search under the automobile exception. United States v. Rogers, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78935 (D. Conn. Apr. 25, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe Government urges the Court to consider the following factors in assessing reasonable suspicion: Defendant’s presence in high narcotic trafficking location with citizen complaints to law enforcement regarding illegal activity; that the officers were responding to an activated panic alarm; Defendant’s evasive action as the officers arrived at the scene; and Sergeant Berg’s observations of the shop owner and employee acting nervously, positioning themselves away from Defendant, asking the officers for help, and telling them that Defendant had a gun and was arguing with one of them. \u2026 The Court finds that reasonable suspicion existed for the stop.\u201d United States v. Diaz-Rojas, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78906 (D.N.J. Apr. 25, 2025).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Despite there being backup at the scene, the protective sweep here is valid. United States v. Antley, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78961 (D.R.I. Apr. 25, 2025). The controlled buy gave probable cause for search under the automobile exception. United States … Continue reading