It isn\u2019t a proper Fourth Amendment challenge for a warrant not to be executed because no one is home. Rodriguez-Ferreira v. Sweeney, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 560 (D.N.J. Jan. 5, 2026).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defense counsel objected to the search warrant twice on Franks grounds and lost. It wasn\u2019t ineffective assistance of counsel to not do it a third time. United States v. Boyle, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 318 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 5, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2254 petitioner\u2019s two search claims (tracking warrant and search of house) are barred by Stone. Hill v. Heath, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 443 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 5, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defense counsel wasn\u2019t ineffective for not moving to suppress text messages from his phone. First, the case he relies on was decided four years after his trial. Second, it wasn\u2019t prejudicial. Cummings v. Guerrero, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 505 (W.D. Tex. Jan. 5, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
It isn\u2019t a proper Fourth Amendment challenge for a warrant not to be executed because no one is home. Rodriguez-Ferreira v. Sweeney, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 560 (D.N.J. Jan. 5, 2026). Defense counsel objected to the search warrant twice on … Continue reading