E.D.Ky.: Objection to USMJ’s findings must specifically challenge 4A rationale

“Defendant’s objections do not address the Magistrate’s analysis or conclusions regarding Grounds 11 and 15. Instead, Defendant vaguely asserts that his counsel should have challenged the ‘validity of [the] evidence[.]’ (DE 406 at 7.) Defendant provides no basis to challenge the validity of the evidence collected in the search of the Berea home, and accordingly, he cannot show any ineffective assistance of counsel on this basis. The Court adopts the Magistrate’s analysis and conclusions regarding Defendant’s Ground 11 claim.” United States v. Smith, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111597 (E.D. Ky. June 23, 2020).

Officers had a founded suspicion defendant was involved in an assault when he was found wearing the specific labeled jacket described by witnesses and he fled as soon as he saw the police. People v. Williams, 2020 NY Slip Op 03569, 2020 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3663 (3d Dept. June 25, 2020).*

This entry was posted in Reasonable suspicion, Standards of review. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.