S.D.N.Y.: Army CID did not violate Posse Comitatus Act by watching CP investigation at West Point

A West Point cadet was the target of a child pornography investigation. HSI investigated it, and the Army CID didn’t violate the Posse Comitatus Act in being there but not doing anything. Hester v. United States, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153312 (S.D. N.Y. Sept. 9, 2019).

The affidavit was not bare bones: it described a controlled buy and a CI’s statement to the officer. This affidavit is substantially the same as in United States v. Jones, 817 F.3d 489 (6th Cir. 2016). United States v. Palacio, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153911 (E.D. Mich. Sept. 10, 2019).*

Petitioner’s successor 2255 raised a claim that his lawyer was ineffective for not effectively litigating his motion to suppress. That’s not a ground for a successor petition. Hernandez-Sanchez v. United States, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155147 (W.D. Wash. Sept. 10, 2019).*

This entry was posted in Ineffective assistance, Probable cause. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.