VA: Mobility for automobile exception doesn’t depend on fact def would be arrested as soon as he got on the motorcycle

The mobility basis for the automobile exception has nothing to do with whether the officer watching would have been able to apprehend defendant if he suddenly appeared and tried to drive the motorcycle off. “Moreover, ‘[a] vehicle’s inherent mobility—not the probability that it might actually be set in motion—is the foundation of the automobile exception’s mobility rationale.’” Also, the automobile exception may apply to a vehicle parked in a private driveway. The dissent notes that this is not a search of a vehicle; it was a search of a tarp covering a vehicle, and that’s a big difference. Collins v. Commonwealth, 2016 Va. LEXIS 124 (Sept. 15, 2016).

Defense counsel was not ineffective for pursuing the motion to suppress on constitutional grounds rather than statutory grounds because he believed the constitutional argument was the only one with possible merits. It was a reasonable strategic choice. Benjegerdes v. State, 2016 Iowa App. LEXIS 940 (Sept. 14, 2016).*

This entry was posted in Automobile exception, Ineffective assistance. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.