Officer\u2019s entry to look for a potential shooting victim was reasonable on exigent circumstances. United States v. Bird, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112088 (E.D. Okla. May 7, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defense counsel wasn\u2019t ineffective for not challenging defendant\u2019s taking DNA by warrant. The warrant was based on a cold CODIS hit and a follow-up warrant was sought. The challenge would fail. Wood v. Schiebner, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 14519 (6th Cir. June 11, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Officers had an arrest warrant for defendant and went to his house, but he wasn\u2019t home. They had information he used his vehicle in burglaries. They waited, and an APLR alert showed where he was. When he got home, they searched his car because it was present for burglaries. The seizure and search of the vehicle was reasonable. McGinnis v. State, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 4023 (Tex. App. \u2013 Dallas June 4, 2025)* (unpublished).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s parole search was with reasonable suspicion and was conducted reasonably. United States v. Robinson, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111571 (N.D. Ohio June 12, 2025).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Officer\u2019s entry to look for a potential shooting victim was reasonable on exigent circumstances. United States v. Bird, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112088 (E.D. Okla. May 7, 2025).* Defense counsel wasn\u2019t ineffective for not challenging defendant\u2019s taking DNA by warrant. … Continue reading