{"id":53176,"date":"2022-09-18T11:45:53","date_gmt":"2022-09-18T16:45:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=53176"},"modified":"2022-09-18T11:46:35","modified_gmt":"2022-09-18T16:46:35","slug":"tn-no-iac-strategic-choice-to-distance-def-from-premises","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=53176","title":{"rendered":"TN: No IAC: strategic choice to distance def from premises"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>Defense counsel wasn\u2019t ineffective for not challenging the search of the premises. The defense at trial was that defendant was merely a guest who didn\u2019t have control of the stuff found there. To link defendant more to the premises was not a good strategic move. Moreover, the appeal brief cites no law that the search would have been invalid or that he had standing. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.tncourts.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/championdwighttwarn2opn.pdf\">Champion v. State<\/a>, 2022 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 412 (Sep. 15, 2022):<\/p>\n\n\n\n<!--more-->\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\"><p>In the present case, the Petitioner failed to cite to any law concerning searches or seizures in his petition or amended petition. The Petitioner&#8217;s appellate brief is likewise deficient in that he fails to cite to any case law concerning the suppression issue and makes minimal argument as to how a motion to suppress would have had merit. &#8220;Issues which are not supported by argument, citation to authorities, or appropriate references to the record will be treated as waived in this court.&#8221; Tenn. Ct. Crim. App. R. 10(b); see Tenn. R. App. P. 27(a)(7). As a result, we conclude that the Petitioner&#8217;s argument regarding prejudice is waived on appeal and that he fails to show that the suppression motion would have been meritorious. See Tommie Phillips, 2022 WL 2092796, at *9.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Defense counsel wasn\u2019t ineffective for not challenging the search of the premises. The defense at trial was that defendant was merely a guest who didn\u2019t have control of the stuff found there. To link defendant more to the premises was &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=53176\">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":[104,23,34],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-53176","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-burden-of-pleading","category-ineffective-assistance","category-standing"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/53176","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=53176"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/53176\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":53177,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/53176\/revisions\/53177"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=53176"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=53176"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=53176"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}