E.D.Mo.: Search incident of backpack cut off handcuffed def was still proper

“In the instant case, as in Perdoma, even though Hill was handcuffed at the time of the search, the circumstances leading up to the search justified the warrantless search. Hill, the subject of a valid arrest warrant, appeared to be under the influence when first encountered by police; he then led police on a rather lengthy foot chase; and, after being tackled by an officer, he resisted being handcuffed. Given the totality of the circumstances, the warrantless search of the backpack, which was still strapped to Hill’s back at the time of his arrest, was a valid search incident to his lawful arrest. As such, Hill’s motion to suppress should be denied.” United States v. Hill, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97285 (E.D. Mo. Apr. 7, 2020).*

Defense counsel could not be ineffective for not challenging defendant’s parole search. Waldron v. United States, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97283 (S.D. W.Va. Apr. 29, 2020),* adopted 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96644 (S.D. W.Va. June 2, 2020).*

This entry was posted in Ineffective assistance, Search incident. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.