Assuming without deciding that removal of a cell phone\u2019s SIM card is a search, it wasn\u2019t unreasonable to merely obtain defendant\u2019s telephone number off it to direct a search warrant to the phone. Defendant also complains of the protective sweep of his house, but he alleges nothing was seized from it. United States v. Bacon, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 210216 (D.Del. Nov. 1, 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s post-conviction claim he was not apprised of the search warrant is rejected. Defense counsel filed a motion to suppress and the state responded. It was withdrawn as a part of a plea agreement which included a statement on the record in the plea colloquy he was waiving the search issue. State v. Miller<\/a>, 2021-Ohio-3882, 2021 Ohio App. LEXIS 3785 (11th Dist. Nov. 1, 2021).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n Defense counsel wasn\u2019t ineffective for not filing a motion to suppress the warrant for defendant\u2019s house. Reviewing the warrant papers, the government showed probable cause and nexus, and any motion would have been denied. United States v. Wells, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 210127 (E.D.La. Nov. 1, 2021).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Assuming without deciding that removal of a cell phone\u2019s SIM card is a search, it wasn\u2019t unreasonable to merely obtain defendant\u2019s telephone number off it to direct a search warrant to the phone. Defendant also complains of the protective sweep … Continue reading