E.D.Pa.: IAC claim has to say what def counsel didn’t try to suppress

An ineffective assistance claim that says defense counsel was ineffective for failing to move to suppress without saying what should have been suppressed states no claim at all. [It would also have to say that it would have been granted if made, and the evidence was prejudicial to the defense.] United States v. Spruill, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119640 (E.D. Pa. September 8, 2015).

Defendant was not seized by an officer who approached him asking to talk to him. In fact, defendant started to walk away from the officer when he fell backwards and was grabbed by the officer, tensing up and acting like he was armed. Only then was he seized, and it was with reasonable suspicion. United States v. Fonville, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119613 (E.D.Mich. September 9, 2015).*

A claim that search warrant affidavits in other states is relevant to the search warrants in this case, and defendant has made a viable claim that the affidavits were not signed by the person named. He thus gets production of handwriting samples pertinent to those affidavits. United States v. Durst, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119989 (E.D. La. September 8, 2015).*

This entry was posted in Burden of proof, Ineffective assistance, Seizure. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.