M.D.Fla.: Lack of a search protocol did not make this computer search invalid (in an IAC claim)

Defendant failed to show in his § 2255 that the failure of defense counsel to file a motion to suppress the search of her computers in a fraud case would have succeeded. No record that was admitted into evidence at the trial was outside a common understanding of the search warrant. Also, there was no search protocol for execution of the warrant, and there is no requirement that there be one. Borden v. United States, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71406 (M.D. Fla. July 15, 2010).*

Defendant’s claim he signed a consent to search form in blank twice, initialing it 24 times, was incredible. United States v. Buckhanon, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71388 (W.D. Tenn. May 19, 2010)*:

Moreover, the court finds Buckhanon’s testimony to be unbelievable in its entirety. It strains credulity to believe that Buckhanon would initial a blank document 24 times and sign it twice if there were no answers filled in the blank spaces. If he was concerned about what he was signing, his mother, sister, and niece were present and could have witnessed the document. Plus, the answers written on the Rights Waiver Form contain a level of detail that would be difficult for the officers to fabricate.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.