CA11: Outsider to case has no standing in Mar-a-Lago SW litigation to challenge PC

Plaintiff, a citizen who is essentially a person on the street with no particular interest in the case, has no ability to intervene in the Mar-a-Lago search warrant case to argue lack of probable cause, something conceded by the parties. He claimed that the parties were wrong to admit probable cause for the search and that the media and government were colluding. The media is litigating, and he has no role. United States v. Barth (In re Sealed Search Warrant United States), 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 20199 (11th Cir. Aug. 4, 2023).

2255 petitioner didn’t show that he would have won a Fourth Amendment issue waived on appeal, so no ineffective assistance of counsel. “The Court is not required to construct legal arguments for” him. Davis v. United States, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135673 (N.D. Ind. Aug. 4, 2023).*

Officers doing a probation search next door to defendant’s house smelled marijuana. They went to his house, pulled him out and entered and searched, using plain view to get a warrant. All this was unreasonable, and the trial court erred in not suppressing. Nance v. State, 2023 Ind. App. LEXIS 223 (Aug. 3, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Ineffective assistance, Motion to suppress, Plain view, feel, smell, Probation / Parole search, Standing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.