Police gathering of IP information about peer-to-peer networks is a legitimate investigative technique, and it violates no reasonable expectation of privacy. United States v. Baalerud, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37650 (W.D.N.C. March 25, 2015).*<\/p>\n
2255 petitioner\u2019s sentence was increased for obstruction by a seized letter that talked about suborning perjury. Defendant can\u2019t show standing for the seizure of the letter in the first place, so his lawyer wasn\u2019t ineffective for not challenging the letter on that ground. He also raised a lack of handwriting analysis that it wasn\u2019t his writing. Withers v. United States, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38396 (W.D.Tenn. March 26, 2015).*<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s consent to search was voluntary. Randolph did not apply to a consent to search a storage building elsewhere. United States v. Aldissi, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 183039 (M.D.Fla. December 5, 2014).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Police gathering of IP information about peer-to-peer networks is a legitimate investigative technique, and it violates no reasonable expectation of privacy. United States v. Baalerud, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37650 (W.D.N.C. March 25, 2015).* 2255 petitioner\u2019s sentence was increased for … Continue reading