{"id":7072,"date":"2012-11-22T11:43:03","date_gmt":"2012-05-04T06:07:58","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2012-05-04T06:07:58","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=7072","title":{"rendered":"S.D.N.Y.: First SW wasn&#8217;t executed and second was obtained; first was valid and obviated any claim from the second"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The government got a search warrant with information from a CI in a white collar case. Instead of executing the warrant, the government gathered some more information, resubmitted the information and obtained a second search warrant which was executed. The alleged Franks violation was not material to the second search warrant\u2019s issuance, and there was plenty of probable cause in the first application. United States v. Mandell, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60925 (S.D. N.Y. May 1, 2012)* [Note: Any problems with the second warrant likely weren&#8217;t sufficient to suppress, but this was an easier resolution of the case.]<\/p>\n<p>Defendant was suspected of possession of drugs, but his driving justified a reasonable suspicion stop for likely possession of drugs. The stop was valid, and there was actually probable cause for the search of the car and search incident for drugs. <a href=\"http:\/\/appellate.nccourts.org\/opinions\/?c=2&amp;pdf=MjAxMi8xMS0xMTc2LTEucGRm\">State v. Watkins<\/a>, 2012 N.C. App. LEXIS 588 (May 1, 2012).*<\/p>\n<p>The defendants were suspected of possession of stolen property moving in interstate commerce. The government did a fly over and spotted a mini excavator nearby which was never established to be on their property. Officers driving by noticed four trailers and they were suspected of having stolen trailers. Officers got a search warrant to enter the property, and it was valid and with probable cause. In any event, the excavator was on open fields 500&#8242; from their house. <a href=\"http:\/\/pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov\/opinion.pdf\/114379.U.pdf\">United States v. Young<\/a>, 477 Fed. Appx. 976 (4th Cir. 2012).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=7072\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7072","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7072","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=7072"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7072\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=7072"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=7072"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=7072"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}