Officers had reason to believe that defendant probationer lived where he had a key and was seen entering. His slamming the door on the officer\u2019s arm also was probable cause that he was resisting. United States v. Asprilla, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24861 (N.D. Cal. March 8, 2011).*<\/p>\n
\u201cIn the present case, Detective Hunter\u2019s affidavit in support of the search warrant reports that Agent Andrews had received information regarding a marijuana grow operation at the property, smelled raw flowering marijuana coming from an outbuilding on the property, observed black pots and pipes at the property, which appeared to be an inactive plant nursery, and therefore believed that the outbuilding and residence were being used to cultivate marijuana.\u201d United States v. Williams, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25503 (S.D. Ga. January 12, 2011).*<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s ineffective assistance claim about defense counsel\u2019s handling of the search issue was unavailing. There was clearly probable cause for issuance of the warrant, the use of CI information was not deficient, and the officer\u2019s failure to knock-and-announce, even if true, would not result in suppression. The IAC claim was essentially conclusory. Byrd v. United States, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24938 (W.D. N.C. March 10, 2011).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading