OH2: 911 call not anonymous for RS purposes because number captured

A 911 call wasn’t anonymous because the number called from was captured. “‘Some factors that significantly support the reliability of an anonymous tip include: “eyewitness knowledge”; a “contemporaneous report”; the fact that an event is startling; and use of the 911 emergency system, which allows for tracing of calls.’ Id. at ¶ 35, quoting Navarette v. California, 572 U.S. 393, 399-401, 134 S.Ct. 1683, 188 L.Ed.2d 680 (2014).” State v. Rutherford, 2020-Ohio-1309, 2020 Ohio App. LEXIS 1238 (2d Dist. Apr. 3, 2020).

Defendant made a Franks challenge which was litigated and lost and which was raised again day 15 of the trial. “The Court strenuously reminded counsel that he continued to pursue such defense since the Franks hearing, despite the denial of his Franks motion, and ignoring the stipulation among the parties as well as the Court’s holding that the search of Delgado’s apartment and any testimony pertaining to police corruption would not be raised at trial.” He doesn’t show prejudice for ineffective assistance of counsel. Galán-Olavarria v. United States, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58361 (D.P.R. Mar. 30, 2020).*

This entry was posted in Ineffective assistance, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.