CA5: COA granted on whether District Court should have held a hearing on IAC claim, but pet’r didn’t brief it. Affirmed.

“Our court granted Pryor a COA on one issue: whether the district court abused its discretion in denying Rule 60(b) relief from the denial of his § 2255 motion, by refusing to consider pages missing from his affidavit in opposition to counsel’s affidavit, and not holding an evidentiary hearing on his claim counsel rendered ineffective assistance regarding the voluntariness of consent to a premises search that resulted in the introduction of evidence seized in that search.” He didn’t however, brief the issue in the COA. Affirmed. United States v. Pryor, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 23298 (5th Cir. Nov. 20, 2017).*

There was a factual basis for this traffic stop, and then the officer smelled marijuana and defendant was stammering. United States v. Hutchins, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188021 (E.D. Mo. Oct. 23, 2017),* adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187557 (E.D. Mo. Nov. 14, 2017).*

This entry was posted in Ineffective assistance, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.