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

Criminal Law

: Fourth Amendment

WA: Littering arrest justified SI

By John Wesley Hall, Jr.

A motion to strike is not the proper method of challenging admission of evidence that should be the subject of a motion to suppress. Arrington v. Commonwealth, 2009 Va. App. LEXIS 146 (March 31, 2009). An officer in an unmarked car was tailing the defendant for suspicion of meth trafficking. When the defendant crossed the center line, he was stopped for the traffic offense, and he validly consented. Sapp v. State, 2009 Ga. App. LEXIS 406 (March 31, 2009).* Littering arrest justified a search incident, and meth was found. State v. Kirwin, 2009 Wash. LEXIS 354 (March 26, 2009), with concurrence and dissent.* Obtaining telephone information is not a Fourth Amendment search. Discovery of a witness by gathering the telephone information was also subject to inevitable discovery [not to mention attenuation which is not applied to witnesses]...continue to full post

Full post as published by Fourth Amendment on April 04, 2009 (boomark / email).