Defendant was not the renter of the hotel room searched, and he showed no connection to the property at all, so he had no standing to challenge the police entry and search. United States v. Golphin, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63517 (M.D. Fla. June 15, 2011).*<\/p>\n
The court accepts the officer\u2019s testimony that defendant was speeding and that justified the stop. (The rest is uncontested by the defendant.) United States v. Figueroa-Cruz, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62455 (D. Kan. June 9, 2011).*<\/p>\n
Defense counsel did not file a motion to suppress, but it would have been waived by the plea agreement, and it is apparent that the defendant needed to plead guilty to \u201chelp himself out.\u201d Beaudion v. United States, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63574 (C.D. Ill. June 16, 2011).*<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s alleged dissatisfaction with his attorney\u2019s performance in the motion to suppress was expressly waived by his plea agreement. United States v. Brookshire, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63749 (N.D. Ind. June 15, 2011).*<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s vague request for the court to review defense counsel\u2019s performance without saying what it was that he failed to do or show prejudice does not show ineffective assistance. Lengen v. United States, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63658 (N.D. Ohio June 15, 2011).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading