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

Criminal Law

: Fourth Amendment

Defendant did not challenge testimony that an inventory policy existed, so it was valid

By John Wesley Hall, Jr.

Defendant did not challenge the officer's [self-serving] assertion that a standardized inventory policy existed. Under Bertine, less intrusive measures were not required, so the officer did not just have to let the vehicle go with somebody else. United States v. Sandifer, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80668 (S.D. Miss. August 11, 2008)* Information from an unnamed state DOJ employee that defendant violated his probation did not satisfy the reasonable suspicion standard. It did not show that he had personal information of illegal activity. Sierra v. State, 2008 Del. LEXIS 467 (October 6, 2008).* State showed that the DUI roadblock in this case satisfied the high state standard. The approval that was challenged as merely being a rubberstamp approval by superiors was still an approval...continue to full post

Full post as published by Fourth Amendment on October 16, 2008 (boomark / email).