{"id":61798,"date":"2025-09-01T00:36:00","date_gmt":"2025-09-01T05:36:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=61798"},"modified":"2025-09-01T17:59:07","modified_gmt":"2025-09-01T22:59:07","slug":"three-on-habeas","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=61798","title":{"rendered":"Six on habeas"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>Petitioner\u2019s habeas claims include a Fourth Amendment claim barred by Stone. Steward v. Napoli, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169230 (S.D.N.Y. July 31, 2025).* Same: Bogan v. Christiansen, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 22218 (6th Cir. Aug. 27, 2025).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The state court applied Jardines to determine entry through an unlocked gate to get access to petitioner\u2019s front door was a reasonable application of federal law. [Stone not discussed.] Popke v. Andes, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169183 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 29, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Even where the Fourth Amendment claim arises at trial, Stone v. Powell applies to bar habeas relief. Robertson v. Guerrero, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 168197 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 28, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Defendant can\u2019t bring his search and seizure claim in habeas. Even as in ineffective assistance of counsel, he can\u2019t prevail because the search wasn\u2019t unreasonable. Church v. Vannoy, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169370 (M.D. La. July 31, 2025),* adopted, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 168332 (M.D. La. Aug. 28, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Search and seizure claims aren\u2019t cognizable in habeas. Sanchez v. Fla. Dep&#8217;t of Corr., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169455 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 31, 2025).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Petitioner\u2019s habeas claims include a Fourth Amendment claim barred by Stone. Steward v. Napoli, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169230 (S.D.N.Y. July 31, 2025).* Same: Bogan v. Christiansen, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 22218 (6th Cir. Aug. 27, 2025). The state court &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=61798\">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":[23,126,132],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-61798","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ineffective-assistance","category-issue-preclusion","category-unreasonable-application--2254d"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61798","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=61798"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61798\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":61822,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61798\/revisions\/61822"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=61798"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=61798"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=61798"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}