TN: Defense counsel’s failure to object to officer’s testimony of def’s confession during suppression hearing violated Simmons but was harmless

Defendant on post-conviction showed that defense counsel’s performance was deficient for not objecting under Simmons to a state investigator’s testimony that he confessed to the crime in his suppression hearing testimony. Defendant, however, can’t show prejudice because of the other strong evidence of guilt before the jury. Campbell v. State, 2019 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 715 (Nov. 8, 2019).

A property owner was complaining about people trespassing on the land. An officer watched defendant trespass while apparently adjusting a gun in his waistband. The officer knew defendant was a felon, so his stop was justified. United States v. Davis, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 193447 (W.D. Mo. Nov. 7, 2019).*

Plaintiff’s Bivens and § 1983 claim filed from the MCC Brooklyn against everybody involved in his case including the witnesses, prosecutors, and the defense lawyer are barred by Heck. Pizarro v. United States, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 193849 (S.D. N.Y. Nov. 5, 2019).*

This entry was posted in Abstention, Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.