CA6: Successor habeas trying to make search claim a Brady issue fails

Successor habeas on ground that audio of dashcam video was muted to conceal a Fourth Amendment violation denied. It doesn’t show actual innocence for 2255(h). In re Jelks, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 18552 (6th Cir. June 21, 2021).

Defendant had his “full and fair opportunity” to litigate suppression in state court, so he has no 2254 habeas claim. Phillip v. Floyd, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 18544 (6th Cir. June 21, 2021).*

Defendant had opportunity to litigate search before direct appeal. Stone v. Powell rule applies to 2255s as well. Johnston v. United States, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116187 (N.D. Ill. June 22, 2021).*

This civil Franks claim fails for lack of materiality; without the challenged information, the search warrant would still have issued. Ross v. James, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 18498 (11th Cir. June 22, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.