7 results for 'cat:"Burglary" AND cat:"Search"'.
[Consolidated.] J. Bassel upholds defendant's multiple convictions for aggravated robbery and related crimes and resulting 45-year sentence. The trial court properly refused to suppress evidence found on his cell phone, as police officers are allowed to obtain non-electronic identifying information from an abandoned phone to obtain a search warrant for the phone's digital information. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Bassel, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: 02-22-00291-CR, Categories: burglary, search, Impersonation
J. Dillard finds that the trial court improperly denied defendant's motion to suppress evidence of unopened cigarette packages and a hammer found in his lunch bag. Defendant was indicted for burglary and possession of tools for the commission of a crime. Police officers had reasonable, articulable suspicion to detain defendant for further investigation based on his presence in the vicinity of a crime during the early morning hours and his decision to flee from a deputy even before the deputy made any contact. However, the search of defendant's bag was not supported by reasonable, articulable suspicion. Reversed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Dillard, Filed On: March 11, 2024, Case #: A23A1677, Categories: burglary, search
J. Gwin finds the trial court erroneously denied defendant's motion to suppress her Google search history. The law enforcement official who applied for the search warrant lacked the necessary expertise to establish probable cause for the search or explain the exact location of the data that would provide a link between defendant and the crime. However, because the evidence of the search, including results for "how to rinse off mace," was not instrumental in the jury's verdict, which was supported by eyewitness testimony and other evidence, the error was harmless and defendant's conviction will be upheld. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Gwin, Filed On: October 17, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-3781, Categories: burglary, Evidence, search
J. Vargas finds that defendant's Fourth Amendment rights were not violated by the police officer who asked for his name and date of birth during a traffic stop. Although he was a passenger in the vehicle, the driver did not have a valid driver's license, which prompted the officer to see if defendant could drive the vehicle home, and made the questioning reasonable and legal. Additionally, defendant's rights under the New Mexico Constitution were not violated by the questions because the presence of bolt cutters, protective goggles and ski masks in the car gave the officer a reasonable suspicion criminal activity had or was likely to occur; therefore, the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress. Affirmed.
Court: New Mexico Supreme Court, Judge: Vargas, Filed On: August 14, 2023, Case #: S-1-SC-38861, Categories: burglary, search
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Moore finds that the trial court properly refused to suppress GPS evidence of defendant's whereabouts that police derived from a tracker placed on his vehicle during a traffic stop. The placement of a tracker was a warrantless search that was lawful because defendant was on parole. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Moore, Filed On: July 19, 2023, Case #: G060536, Categories: burglary, Parole, search