KS: Car search had PC, so trial court erred in suppressing

The trial court erred in suppressing the search of the car. There was probable cause for a search for drugs, and that allowed the officer to search anywhere drugs would be found. State v. Knight, 2018 Kan. App. LEXIS 28 (May 18, 2018).*

The trial court denied suppression based on an in camera review of the affidavit for search warrant, which New York does for CI statements. Defense counsel didn’t seek to look at it himself. The state courts held that to not be ineffective assistance of counsel. That’s unreasonable for Strickland purposes under § 2254(d). Boyland v. Artus, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 12776 (2d Cir. May 17, 2018).*

Defendant’s 2255 alleged Fourth Amendment violations and was dismissed. He alleged separately in a successor that the affidavit in support of the search warrant was based on falsified information. Dismissed as a successor petition. United States v. White, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83171 (W.D. Va. May 17, 2018).*

This entry was posted in Automobile exception, Ineffective assistance. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.