No, the defendant doesn’t get to continue litigating his Fourth Amendment claim into infinity by going to 2255 after loosing the appeal. White v. United States, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70628 (D. Md. Apr. 26, 2018):
The record is clear that White has raised and been heard on this point repeatedly, at the pretrial, trial, post-trial, and appeal stages. See ECF No. 98 at 78 (argument raised at pretrial motions hearing); ECF No. 124 at 181 (argument raised during trial); ECF No. 101 (argument raised in post-trial Supplement to Defendant’s Motion to Set Aside The Verdict); Opening Brief of Appellant, 2015 WL 4141745, at *36, United States of America v. White, 641 Fed. App’x 211 (4th Cir. 2016) (No. 14-4944) (argument raised in appellate brief). This Court and the Fourth Circuit have ruled that the police searched White’s storage unit only after they obtained a search warrant; thus, his Fourth Amendment rights were not violated. United States v. White, 641 Fed. App’x 211, 212 (4th Cir. 2016). White cannot collaterally attack that determination here. See United States v. Cucci, 166 F.3d 335 (4th Cir. 1998) (unpub.) (“[B]ecause Cucci was afforded a full and fair opportunity to litigate the legality of the search at trial and on appeal, this claim cannot be raised in collateral review before this court.”). Thus, White’s motions are denied regarding his Fourth Amendment claims.