A Park Ranger in Acadia National Park in Maine followed Maine law to get a blood sample without a search warrant. There were no exigent circumstances, and the blood sample is suppressed. United States v. Manubolu, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142710 (D. Me. Aug. 10, 2020).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cHowell has not established that he was prejudiced by counsel’s failure to bring the suppression claim. Howell’s sole argument for why this search should have been deemed unconstitutional is that it was \u2018an impossibility given the circumstances\u2019 that the police could have seen the firearm \u2018\u201cunder the seat\u201d of the vehicle\u2019 and hence no probable cause existed. \u2026 Howell provides no factual support for his conclusion that it was impossible for the officer to see the gun, nor does he raise any theories suggesting why probable cause for a search could not have existed otherwise. Such a conclusory statement or blanket assertion does not establish any grounds on which counsel could have filed a meritorious motion to suppress, and Howell accordingly has not demonstrated that he was prejudiced by counsel’s failure to file such a motion.\u201d In addition, this claim appears to be a barred successor petition. United States v. Howell, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142777 (N.D. Ohio Aug. 10, 2020).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A Park Ranger in Acadia National Park in Maine followed Maine law to get a blood sample without a search warrant. There were no exigent circumstances, and the blood sample is suppressed. United States v. Manubolu, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS … Continue reading