CA2: Motion to reopen suppression hearing for alleged IAC was subject to abuse of discretion; not abused here

Defendant attempted to reopen his suppression hearing based on alleged ineffective assistance by former counsel. The trial court denied the motion based on a credibility determination of the witnesses. The place to bring the IAC claim is in post-conviction. The denial of the motion to reopen was within the discretion of the trial court. United States v. Person, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 22448 (2d Cir. Aug. 14, 2018).

Defendant stop at the Albuquerque Greyhound station turned nonconsensual. “SA Perry and TFO Davis attempted to conduct a consensual encounter. The Court has considered that the agents used non-aggressive tone, did not show their weapons, and that the interaction took place in an open, public space. However, several aspects of the encounter lead the Court to conclude that a reasonable person would not have felt free to leave. Accordingly, the Court finds that Mr. Garcia-Garibay’s consent to a dog sniff was not voluntary and obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The methamphetamine seized must be suppressed.” United States v. Garcia-Garibay, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136888 (D.N.M. Aug. 14, 2018).*

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

Comments are closed.