E.D.Cal.: Affidavit for SW for def being a prohibited person for firearms possession doesn’t have to allege interstate commerce nexus

A warrant was issued for defendant’s home in California for proof of travel to the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol. Officers found firearms and defendant was a prohibited person because of domestic violence orders. On the firearms warrant, it wasn’t required for the officers to allege they were manufactured outside of California. United States v. Martin, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20680 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 5, 2024).

Defendant couldn’t claim ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal of defense counsel’s failure to move to suppress BAC results. Brunswick Cty. v. McCoy, 2024 N.C. App. LEXIS 71 (Feb. 6, 2024).*

The fact everybody violates some traffic law at some time doesn’t make a stop invalid under Whren. United States v. Hennings, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20500 (E.D. Mo. Feb. 6, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Probable cause. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.