There was a factual basis for the stop, and the drug dog at hand did not prolong the stop. After the alert, defendant then consented to the search of the vehicle. United States v. Navarro, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3062 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 8, 2020).<\/p>\n
There was no ineffective assistance of counsel for defense counsel\u2019s alleged failure to investigate a sexual relationship between the officer and the woman who provided the SD card with the child pornography on it that led to the search warrant in the case. Nothing he alleges would undermine the search warrant affidavit. Moreover, the officer interviewed the children in the videos, and that\u2019s shown in the affidavit for warrant. \u201cEven if it were, Defendant never clearly explains what evidence trial counsel would have obtained that could not be drawn out on cross-examination of Government witnesses and that would have led trial counsel to provide Defendant with different advice regarding the plea agreement, or led Defendant to proceed to trial, and so Defendant fails to meet his burden of demonstrating that any deficiency resulted in actual prejudice.\u201d United States v. Bates, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2475 (W.D. Ark. Jan. 8, 2020).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
There was a factual basis for the stop, and the drug dog at hand did not prolong the stop. After the alert, defendant then consented to the search of the vehicle. United States v. Navarro, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3062 … Continue reading