legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Logan
Defendant Andrew Logan appeals from a judgment of conviction entered after he pleaded guilty to one count of possession of a controlled substance. Logan contends that police officers obtained certain evidence against him as a result of an unlawful search and seizure, and that the trial court should have suppressed the evidence.
Logan raises two grounds for reversal of his conviction. First, Logan asserts that police officers seized him in violation of the Fourth Amendment because the seizure occurred without a warrant, and was not based on reasonable suspicion. Second, Logan contends that the manner in which police officers searched and seized him after they learned of his status as a parolee demonstrates that the search and seizure were arbitrary and capricious, and were undertaken for the purpose of harassment and/or for other improper purposes.
Court conclude that the trial court's findings, which are supported by substantial evidence, establish that police officers did not seize and/or search Logan until after they learned that he was on parole. The seizure and search thus were not unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Further, there is no basis for concluding that the officers acted arbitrarily, capriciously, or for some improper purpose when they detained and searched Logan after they learned that he was a parolee. Court therefore affirm the judgment of conviction.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale