NE: No REP in cell in pretrial detention for evidence of witness tampering; also, SW obtained

The state got a search warrant for a pretrial detainee’s county jail cell for evidence of witness tampering. The search was not institutional security. The trial court suppressed, but the court of appeals reversed: there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a jail cell, even for a pretrial detainee. Moreover, the use of a search warrant showed the officers’ good faith, and the exclusionary rule should not be applied. State v. Kuek, 2021 Neb. App. LEXIS 203 (Aug. 17, 2021) (unpublished).

Defendant’s post-conviction claim that defense counsel didn’t properly challenge the search in his case doesn’t have merit. There’s no showing that it would matter or that the outcome would be different. “As outlined above, Smith has put forth no evidence that he could have made a successful Fourth Amendment challenge to the stop and search of his vehicle. Even if he did, Smith could not demonstrate prejudice. As noted above, Trooper Withers would still have inevitably discovered (and seized) the narcotics in Smith’s vehicle following Smith’s arrest on the California warrant. Smith therefore cannot demonstrate that Mr. de Montreux was ‘completely unreasonable’ in declining to appeal the suppression ruling on his Fourth Amendment claim.” Smith v. United States, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154165 (D.Utah Aug. 12, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Ineffective assistance, Prison and jail searches. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.