OH2: Search of defendant’s cell phone case during patdown not shown with RS

The search of defendant’s cell phone case felt during a patdown could not reasonably be shown to be a weapon or contraband that would justify it. The officer was predisposed because she testified she assumed everybody was armed. State v. Gorby, 2014-Ohio-2445, 2014 Ohio App. LEXIS 2373 (2d Dist. June 6, 2014).

A 2255 claim that defense counsel should have challenged the search warrants used in his case, waived by the guilty plea, doesn’t state grounds for relief because there’s no showing of a likelihood of success. Shuron v. United States, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75804 (D. Md. June 4, 2014).*

Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the business area of the convenience store he ran on a reservation. He lived in a separate house, and he claimed he also lived there because he sometimes slept in a back room, but it was his business and open to the public and the common area was at issue. United States v. Long, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77196 (D. S.D. June 6, 2014),* R&R 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78229 (D. S.D. February 3, 2014).*