Defendant consented to a search of his cell phone. \u201cDefendant expressly directed Officer Rudolph to look in Defendant’s cellular telephone when Officer Rudolph informed Defendant that the telephone would be seized as evidence. The statement that \u2018[t]here’s not going to be anything in there\u2019 reinforces the lack of limitation with respect to the scope of consent.\u201d United States v. Denton, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61014 (E.D. Mo. Mar. 29, 2017), adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60260 (E.D. Mo. April 20, 2017)<\/p>\n
Defendant can\u2019t raise a search claim in a 2255 where he pled guilty and he doesn\u2019t allege IAC. Ogunleye v. United States, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61628 (N.D. Tex. March 31, 2017).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant consented to a search of his cell phone. \u201cDefendant expressly directed Officer Rudolph to look in Defendant’s cellular telephone when Officer Rudolph informed Defendant that the telephone would be seized as evidence. The statement that \u2018[t]here’s not going to … Continue reading