Consent to seizure of defendant\u2019s cell phone was voluntary: \u201cThere is no evidence in the record suggesting Thompson’s consent to turn over her phone was involuntary. The request for her phone occurred in a public place and the entirety of the interaction which led to the consent and retrieval of the phone occurred within twenty minutes. Thompson was told that she was not under arrest and that she was free to leave.\u201d United States v. Thompson, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35241 (D.Minn. Jan. 3, 2020),* adopted, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34456 (D. Minn. Feb. 28, 2020).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s 2255 is meritless. Her lawyer didn\u2019t raise a Fourth Amendment challenge for lack of standing and lack of merit. The codefendant lost at trial and in the Ninth Circuit on the merits and that same result would have happened here. United States v. Williams, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34640 (D. Nev. Feb. 28, 2020).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Consent to seizure of defendant\u2019s cell phone was voluntary: \u201cThere is no evidence in the record suggesting Thompson’s consent to turn over her phone was involuntary. The request for her phone occurred in a public place and the entirety of … Continue reading