A PAROLEE cannot win the suppression of drugs seized from his property by claiming that his probation officer conducting a home visit improperly colluded with drug agents in uncovering the evidence, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has ruled.
March 07, 2002 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
A PAROLEE cannot win the suppression of drugs seized from his property by claiming that his probation officer conducting a home visit improperly colluded with drug agents in uncovering the evidence, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has ruled.
Declaring the so-called “stalking horse” defense theory to be non-existent, the Second Circuit upheld a Northern District judge’s refusal to suppress evidence in the case of parolee Donald Reyes.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The New York Law Journal honors attorneys and judges who have made a remarkable difference in the legal profession in New York.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
