Defendant who voluntarily returned to his home in his own car voluntarily consented to a search of the house. United States v. Rodas, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72970 (D.S.C. May 23, 2013).*<\/p>\n
Officers learned of file sharing of child pornography at a particular IP address. Sharing the wireless router was someone not living in that house. There was no CP in the house. The car next door was registered to a person with the same first name as on the other computers accessing the router. They did a knock-and-talk and let him go to work and got a SW for the house. United States v. Keiter, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73233 (D.Neb. April 29, 2013).*<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s claim of a lack of particularity in the search warrant was not timely made before trial so it is waived. United States v. Kaplan<\/a>, 526 Fed. Appx. 208 (3d Cir. 2013).*<\/p>\n Defendant was handcuffed and going to be searched, and the officer asked him if he had anything on him that would stab the officer. He said he had a gun. That was not a custodial interrogation designed to elicit an incriminating response about a gun. [Besides, the frisk was going to occur anyway.] United States v. Nagy, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73197 (N.D. Ohio May 23, 2013).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading