Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Fourth Amendment

Criminal Law

: Fourth Amendment

E.D.N.Y.: Protective sweep was justified by specific facts

By John Wesley Hall, Jr.

During a protective sweep on specific facts, a gun was seen in plain view. It was not seized, but a consent was obtained for the gun and it was retrieved. The consent was valid, too. “The facts in this case mirror, virtually precisely, the facts in [United States v. Gandia, 276 Fed.Appx. 10 (2d Cir. 2008)], and even more so.” United States v. Aguilar, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23120 (E.D. N.Y. March 8, 2011).* The officer developed reasonable suspicion after a valid traffic stop, and he called in a drug dog which alerted. This was not a search incident, but a search under the automobile exception. United States v. Riley, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23394 (W.D. Mo. February 4, 2011), adopted 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23400 (W.D. Mo. March 8, 2011)...continue to full post

Full post as published by Fourth Amendment on March 11, 2011 (boomark / email).