Defendant worked for a business as a bookkeeper and he kept records on his work computer and one the company provided at this house. While he was on a trip, the company received mail that suggested that defendant was embezzling from it. They checked the work computer and did not find records for a whole year. They went to his house and asked for the work computer which his wife provided. Back at work they looked through the computer using the company password and found the evidence of embezzlement, which they gave to the government. This was all a private search not governed by the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Brown, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54382 (S.D. Ind. April 18, 2012).*<\/p>\n
It was reasonable to impound a vehicle that would have had to be left in a high crime area and was at risk of being broken into. There was no need to give the car to a present potential driver when there was no showing of insurance to drive it and the registration was expired. United States v. McKinnon<\/a>, 681 F.3d 203 (5th Cir. 2012)* [Note: The court almost lost me with the insurance comment because that would be shifting the burden. They should have left that out.]<\/p>\n There was reasonable suspicion for defendant\u2019s stop and frisk because it was a high crime area, defendant was walking funny like he had a gun on him, and when he \u201cbladed\u201d the officer could see the outline of a gun. United States v. Carson, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54372 (D. N.J. April 18, 2012).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading