E.D.Tenn.: Def’s efforts to distance self from drugs at suppression hearing costs him standing

The defendant’s statements to the USMJ that he was neither a resident nor a guest at the house searched denies him standing to contest the search there. United States v. Griffin, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3695 (E.D. Tenn. January 13, 2015).

Officers were in a “high crime area,” an apartment complex, and approached a group of men obviously smoking pot. Defendant ran, and they pursued. “Upon consideration of Officer Olson’s testimony, the audiovisual recording, and the remaining evidence, the Court finds that Defendant’s flight from the officers was not improperly provoked by the officers’ actions. Rather, Defendant’s flight was unprovoked and was sufficient to warrant the officers’ pursuit and seizure of Defendant. Indeed, given the residential nature of the area and the presence of many bystanders—including children—the officers had little choice but to pursue the Defendant to determine if he presented a risk to the public.” He was found with a gun on him, and he’s charged with felon in possession. United States v. Luckett, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3860 (M.D. Fla. January 13, 2015).*

Defense counsel was not ineffective for not challenging the private search of an electronic device for child pornography that was given by his girlfriend to the police. Then a probation search was performed and more was seized. They were all searched by warrant. No motion to suppress would have succeeded. Therefore, no IAC. United States v. Shouse, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3345 (D. Mont. January 12, 2015).*