W.D.N.C.: Def counsel not ineffective for not arguing Carpenter protects bank records because it doesn’t

There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in bank records such that the government needed a warrant to get them. Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not arguing that there was such an interest. “Carpenter did not overrule Miller but merely limited Miller in the context of modern cell phone technology.” Darcy v. United States, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5026 (W.D. N.C. Jan. 11, 2021).*

Defense counsel made a reasoned judgment not to file a motion to suppress for lack of probable cause where there was probable cause. United States v. Saad, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5080 (D.R.I. Jan. 12, 2021).*

Defense counsel filed a motion to suppress but then didn’t pursue it because he determined it was unwinnable. “Mr. Stevens does not show how Mr. Folsom’s strategic decision to withdraw the motion and not investigate further was unreasonable, let alone in light of the heavy measure of deference given to Folsom. Therefore, Mr. Stevens has not shown that reasonable jurists would find the District Court’s determination debatable or wrong.” Stevens v. United States, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 696 (11th Cir. Jan. 11, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Ineffective assistance, Third Party Doctrine. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.