FL6: Def confesses error that his motion to suppress abandoned property shouldn’t have been granted

Defendant moved to suppress something he threw away in flight from the police, and the trial court granted it. On appeal, he confesses error that it was abandoned. Reversed. State v. Howard, 2024 Fla. App. LEXIS 9246 (Fla. 6th DCA Nov. 27, 2024).* [I would love to see the discussion on remand, maybe something like:”So you filed this motion to suppress; convinced me to grant it; and then backed up on it on appeal? Why should I believe you the next time you file a motion to suppress?”]

Defendant’s gun was found in his flight path attempting to avoid being stopped. There was thus no reasonable expectation of privacy. On “four corners review” of the search warrant, there was plenty of probable cause. United States v. Berry, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 215238 (D. Minn. Oct. 17, 2024).*

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not moving to suppress the cell phone data search, and it didn’t matter anyway. Other evidence put defendant at the scene of the crime. Bradley v. Taskila, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 215271 (E.D. Mich. Nov. 26, 2024).*

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

Comments are closed.