TN: There’s normally no reason why the judge that issued the SW would be a witness at a suppression hearing on a Franks motion

The judge that issued the search warrant is not required to recuse from being the trial judge, so there was no ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to raise that issue. Moreover, the issuing judge would not be a witness at a suppression hearing in a Franks challenge. “We see no need, under normal circumstances, why the judge who issued the search warrant is a needed witness at a Franks hearing.” Also, judges who issue search warrants often handle the suppression hearings. Defendant’s Franks challenge is moot because the search warrant didn’t matter–there was probable cause and exigent circumstances for the automobile exception. Harris v. State, 2018 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 266 (Apr. 6, 2018).

Defendant had a full and fair opportunity to litigate his search issue in state court and did. Therefore, his 2254 claim is barred. Norris v. Noble, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57922 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 5, 2018).*

This entry was posted in Franks doctrine, Suppression hearings. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.