Alleged mishandling of the paperwork on a search warrant for new DNA in a cold case hit could have resulted in a motion to suppress, but it’s not obvious that it would be granted because procedural defects in the return are overlooked if there is no prejudice. “Our case law suggests that procedural errors not included in Rule 41(g) do not result in suppression of the evidence.” Schaffer v. State, 2017 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 240 (March 31, 2017) (see Treatise § 59.05 n.4).
Defense counsel were not ineffective for not challenging the search of defendant’s car because his wife consented to it, and he expressly did not want to involve his wife, and he likely abandoned it by running from the police after the stop. Ramirez v. United States, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47800 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 17, 2017).*