CA10: Evidence obtained by state in prosecution later barred by McGirt still with good faith

Defendant was originally prosecuted in Oklahoma state court for murder. After McGirt v. Oklahoma, he moved to set aside the Oklahoma conviction as being obtained without jurisdiction. In federal court, he moved to suppress the evidence obtained by the state as lacking jurisdiction. The good faith exception applies. The state officials were acting on the understanding of the law at the time. United States v. Pemberton, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 5219 (10th Cir. Mar. 4, 2024).

Defense counsel’s choice of how to challenge the search warrant affidavit was not ineffective assistance of counsel. “In light of all of the evidence, challenging the search warrant issued on the basis of the statements made by Shelly N. was not a reasonable course of action.” United States v. Ballard, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37366 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 4, 2024).*

Senator Menendez’s case: ESI and two home warrants not suppressed on a Franks challenge. “[T]he omissions are neither material nor critical. Finally, the omission of inculpatory information, such as certain of the alleged omissions discussed above, cannot be evidence of intent to mislead.” United States v. Menendez, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37387 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 4, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Franks doctrine, Good faith exception, Ineffective assistance. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.