Jun 182010
 June 18, 2010  Posted by  Court, Surveillance, U.S.

John Wesley Hall, Jr. writes:

The CI was corroborated in significant part, and the CI had a good track record, so the stop was justified by that and the fact the registration expired. A drug dog was used on the vehicle, and the defendant has the burden of showing the drug dog was unqualified. United States v. Nguyen, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59455 (D. Utah June 15, 2010).*

Note: This is just so fundamentally wrong, and I am shocked, shocked that a judge can still be that obtuse in 2010. (See this post from May on the same issue where a federal judge granted a motion to reconsider after applying the wrong burden of proof at the government’s request. “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help you.”)

Let me say it again for the Fourth Amendment impaired in the judiciary and government:

Read more of John’s discussion of this issue on FourthAmendment.com

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.