The court finds that a minimal showing of at least recklessness was made in a representation in the search warrant application that a black cloth had not been disturbed during a crime. The video surveillance shows several people did. On the probable cause showing, however, defendant fails because his DNA was on the cloth “with an error rate of 1 in 138 cotillion.” United States v. North, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18330 (D. Nev. Feb. 5, 2019).
Defendant had his full and fair opportunity to litigate his suppression motion in state court, did, and lost. It can’t now form the basis of a habeas claim. Scott v. Sheldon, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17400 (N.D. Ohio Feb. 4, 2019).*