W.D.Va.: Def’s supervised release terms informed his lack of standing in someone else’s place

Defendant’s supervised release terms helped determine his lack of standing in the place searched. “Under the totality of these circumstances, the court finds that Howard does not have standing to contest the search of Morris’s home and the subsequent seizure of his phone. From the evidence presented to this court, Howard’s connection to Morris’s home was short, limited in scope and depth, and unauthorized under the terms of his supervised release, which is why he was arrested in the first place.” United States v. Stockton, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60048 (W.D. Va. Mar. 29, 2021).

Defendant raised the lack of probable cause on direct appeal and lost. In his 2255, he raises ineffective assistance for not making a Franks challenge from the absence of a toxicology report, which is completely unavailing. Fuqua v. United States, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59544 (M.D. Tenn. Mar. 29, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Standing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.