D.Md.: Credibility question shown on whether def counsel failed to call material witness at suppression hearing; hearing ordered

Petitioner alleged enough to get a hearing on his 2255 that defense counsel didn’t call a material witness at the suppression hearing that would have created a credibility dispute with the officers as to the nature of the entry. Defense counsel claimed he was never told of the witness; petitioner said that he did. A hearing will be scheduled to resolve the credibility issue. Hill v. United States, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110705 (D. Md. July 3, 2018).*

Defendant counsel wasn’t ineffective for not moving to suppress defendant’s blood search because there were exigent circumstances under Birchfield, and no motion to suppress would have been granted. State v. Dalton, 2018 WI 85, 2018 Wisc. LEXIS 311 (July 3, 2018).*

This entry was posted in Ineffective assistance. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.