W.D.Ark.: When challenging SW, def has burden of pleading to attach the SW and affidavit to the motion to suppress

When challenging a search warrant, the defendant needs to attach the warrant and affidavit to the motion to suppress. The government did instead. Here, the search warrant wasn’t even needed because there was probable cause for a vehicle search under the automobile exception. “Because the totality of the circumstances gave rise to probable cause sufficient to make a search of the motorhome or the jeep reasonable, even without a warrant, the warrant itself does not become invalid simply because the affidavit did not make explicit the basis for probable cause to believe marijuana would also be found in the Jeep.” United States v. Whittingslow, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141531 (W.D. Ark. Aug. 21, 2018).

Defense counsel raised a Franks challenge in the original proceedings, it was litigated, and he lost. Now he raises it as an ineffective assistance of counsel. Because he can’t show defense counsel did anything that prejudiced him, it’s denied. Miller v. United States, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140688 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 20, 2018).*

This entry was posted in Automobile exception, Burden of pleading, Ineffective assistance. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.