TN: Def can’t show prejudice for IAC claim for failing to call a witness he can’t identify or summarize testimony of

Defendant filed a post-conviction petition alleging that a necessary witness hadn’t been called for the suppression hearing. He could not, however, provide any decent information about name, where she could be found, what she would say, or that it would change the outcome of the suppression hearing on the informant hearsay. Nothing defendant shows on appeal shows the trial court’s decision was clearly erroneous. Ferguson v. State, 2019 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 760 (Nov. 26, 2019).*

Repeal of the part of a rental inspection ordinance made the Fourth Amendment controversy moot. Zaatari v. City of Austin, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 10290 (Tex. App. — Austin Nov. 27, 2019).*

Plaintiff’s § 1983 claim was filed five years out of time and was barred. Sease v. Darko, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 35540 (7th Cir. Nov. 27, 2019).*

This entry was posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Ineffective assistance. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.