CA6: 2255 argument that def counsel didn’t make “best arguments for suppression” fails; he’d still lose

“Maurice Carter pled guilty to a variety of sex crimes and received a twenty-year prison sentence. He now petitions for habeas relief. Carter alleges his attorneys were constitutionally ineffective for failing to make the best arguments for suppression of key evidence. Yet even if Carter’s counsel had made different arguments, the end result in his case would have remained the same—the evidence against Carter would have come in. Therefore, we affirm the district court and deny Carter’s habeas petition.” Carter v. Parris, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 34622 (6th Cir. Dec. 10, 2018).

“Overall, initially there was a basis for the Terry search which developed into probable cause to search the vehicle based on the marijuana observed in plain view and the cash with the smell of marijuana. There was no violation of the Fourth Amendment and no basis to suppress the evidence. Shkambi’s complaints about the search lack merit.” Shkambi v. United States, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 208765 (E.D. Tex. Nov. 12, 2018), adopted, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 208065 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 10, 2018).*

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

Comments are closed.