DE: Untimely motion to suppress properly denied; def would lose on the merits anyway

Failure to file a motion to suppress before trial constituted a waiver of claims regarding the admissibility of items found at defendant’s garage. There was no plain error in the application of the inevitable discovery rule because it was clear that police would have inevitably discovered the address of the garage though other lawful means, such as walking up to and looking at the garage mailbox, without needing to test defendant’s keys. The affidavit for the search warrant showed a nexus between drug dealing and the garage–it provided at least two observations of illegal and suspicious activity there, including defendant illegally purchasing a firearm at the garage. Bradley v. State, 2019 Del. LEXIS 48 (Feb. 4, 2019).*

Defendant’s argument on post-conviction that trial counsel was ineffective was not sufficiently formulated to even be decided. Hoskins v. State, 2019 Iowa App. LEXIS 106 (Feb. 6, 2019).*

This entry was posted in Ineffective assistance, Motion to suppress. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.