{"id":46844,"date":"2021-01-13T13:32:10","date_gmt":"2021-01-13T18:32:10","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=46844"},"modified":"2021-01-13T13:32:10","modified_gmt":"2021-01-13T18:32:10","slug":"ca4-ptfs-claim-the-statute-he-was-arrested-under-was-unconstitutional-is-barred-by-defillippo","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=46844","title":{"rendered":"CA4: Ptf&#8217;s claim the statute he was arrested under was unconstitutional is barred by <em>DeFillippo<\/em>"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>Plaintiff\u2019s claim that his arrest and search was invalid because the statute under which he was stopped and arrested was unconstitutional is barred by Michigan v. DeFillippo. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ca4.uscourts.gov\/opinions\/201682.U.pdf\">Quigley v. City of Huntington<\/a>, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 760 (4th Cir. Jan. 12, 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This habeas petitioner disagrees with the standard of review applied by a division of the Ohio Court of Appeals which considered and determined his Fourth Amendment claim against him. Still, the state court considered the merits of his claim and that\u2019s not denying him a full and fair opportunity to litigate it. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov\/opinions.pdf\/21a0028n-06.pdf\">Terrell v. Sheldon<\/a>, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 853 (6th Cir. Jan. 13, 2021).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Plaintiff\u2019s claim that his arrest and search was invalid because the statute under which he was stopped and arrested was unconstitutional is barred by Michigan v. DeFillippo. Quigley v. City of Huntington, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 760 (4th Cir. Jan. &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=46844\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14,11,126,96],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-46844","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-exclusionary-rule","category-good-faith-exception","category-issue-preclusion","category-standards-of-review"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/46844","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=46844"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/46844\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":46845,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/46844\/revisions\/46845"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=46844"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=46844"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=46844"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}