D.N.J.: Someone doesn’t have to be home to execute a SW

It isn’t a proper Fourth Amendment challenge for a warrant not to be executed because no one is home. Rodriguez-Ferreira v. Sweeney, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 560 (D.N.J. Jan. 5, 2026).

Defense counsel objected to the search warrant twice on Franks grounds and lost. It wasn’t ineffective assistance of counsel to not do it a third time. United States v. Boyle, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 318 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 5, 2026).*

2254 petitioner’s two search claims (tracking warrant and search of house) are barred by Stone. Hill v. Heath, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 443 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 5, 2026).*

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not moving to suppress text messages from his phone. First, the case he relies on was decided four years after his trial. Second, it wasn’t prejudicial. Cummings v. Guerrero, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 505 (W.D. Tex. Jan. 5, 2026).*

This entry was posted in Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Unreasonable application / § 2254(d), Warrant execution. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.