The search of defendant\u2019s jail cell for evidence of witness tampering in his \u201cwork product\u201d was reasonable, and the government used a taint team to segregate it. \u201cThe government’s conduct in this case was neither ill-conceived nor outrageous. It must be remembered Mr. Milk has neither a Fourth Amendment nor a Fifth Amendment right in the materials he possessed in his jail cell. \u2026 It was proper for the agents to enter Mr. Milk’s jail cell to determine if he was engaged in witness tampering or making threats against witnesses in either the trial of Brandon Janis or his own trial.\u201d United States v. Milk, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 197499 (D.S.D. Oct. 23, 2020).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s claim defense counsel was ineffective for not pursuing his alleged Fourth Amendment claim fails because it was completely unmeritorious. Moody v. United States, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 197793 (E.D. Va. Oct. 23, 2020).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The search of defendant\u2019s jail cell for evidence of witness tampering in his \u201cwork product\u201d was reasonable, and the government used a taint team to segregate it. \u201cThe government’s conduct in this case was neither ill-conceived nor outrageous. It must … Continue reading