M.D.Fla.: Not IAC to not call private searcher at suppression hearing where it wouldn’t have changed the outcome

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not calling a “hotel maid” who found defendant’s gun at the suppression hearing that led to his ACCA sentence. He doesn’t show that she would have changed the outcome. The private search issue was litigated on the direct appeal. Allen v. United States, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42194 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 10, 2025).

“[W]e find that the court properly denied defendant’s motion to controvert the search warrant because the no-knock provision was authorized based on sufficient information supporting the conclusion that defendant might be present with immediate access to firearms when the search warrant was executed.” People v. McCray, 2025 NY Slip Op 01324 (1st Dept. Mar. 11, 2025).*

The claimant’s claim was properly struck for refusal to answer interrogatories about where the money seized came from. United States v. $1,106,775.00 in United States Currency, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5598 (9th Cir. Mar. 11, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Forfeiture, Ineffective assistance, Knock and announce. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.