Search warrant for property did not need to specifically name the target

Search warrant for property did not need to specifically name the target. “The Fourth Amendment does not require that a search warrant name the owners or residents of the property to be searched.” Martin v. Indiana State Police, 537 F. Supp. 2d 974 (S.D. Ind. 2008).*

Claim raised on direct appeal may not be relitigated in a § 2255, and it would appear that SCOTUS would not permit a search claim to be raised in a § 2255 anyway. Evans v. United States, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6704 (D. R.I. January 29, 2008).*

Owner of camper who allowed the defendant, a probationer, to stay in the camper for a night after defendant had an argument with his wife had apparent authority to consent to a search of the camper after the defendant’s arrest. United States v. Robare, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6491 (N.D. N.Y. January 29, 2008).*

Habeas petitioner’s claim that defense counsel failed to put on sufficient evidence to properly present the search claim was decided by the state court that the missing evidence would not have altered the outcome, and that was binding on habeas. Smith v. Kemna, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6513 (W.D. Mo. January 29, 2008).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.