The fact the U.S. Marshals transferred plaintiff from one jail to another in pretrial detention did not state a Fourth Amendment claim for an unreasonable seizure without alleging a lot more not even present. Vega v. United States, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157102 (W.D. Wash. November 1, 2012).*<\/p>\n
Defense counsel was not ineffective for not moving to suppress the stop in this case because there was at least a technical violation of the traffic code, and that justified the stop. \u201cIn light of the holding of Mosley, the stop was lawful because a traffic infraction can be used as a pretext for investigation into the drug activity. Mosley, 454 F.3d at 252. … \u2018[C]ounsel cannot be deemed ineffective for failing to raise a meritless claim.\u2019 …\u201d Ferguson v. United States, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157341 (W.D. Pa. November 2, 2012).*<\/p>\n
That defendant had pictures of a naked child not his own was PC for child pornography at least under Pennslyvania law. The fact a parent might have an innocent picture of his or her own child is different. United States v. Kofalt, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157349 (W.D. Pa. November 2, 2012).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading