D.P.R.: Alleged false GJ testimony as an alleged 4A violation rejected as new Bivens ground

“Plaintiff grounds his Bivens cause of action in an allegation that Garay, a CBP officer, violated his Fourth Amendment rights by procuring his indictment based on supposedly intentional false testimony in which Garay stated that Plaintiff knowingly possessed and transported false documents. In evaluating Plaintiff’s claim, the Court applies the two-step analytical process as articulated in Ziglar and re-stated in Egbert.” This is a new Bivens context and the case is dismissed. Sánchez-Jiménez v. United States, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44744 (D.P.R. Mar. 6, 2024).

A common 2255 ground rejected: “As set forth in detail above, Williams has implied but failed to demonstrate that his guilty plea was improperly induced, involuntary, or unintelligently given. Williams does not allege in his motion or supporting brief that his counsel’s withdrawal of the suppression motion and alleged failure to investigate the confidential informant rendered his guilty plea unknowing or involuntary. Thus, Williams’ claims of ineffective assistance of counsel based on his attorney’s alleged failure to conduct an adequate pretrial investigation and withdrawal of the suppression motion are waived.” Williams v. United States, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45303 (S.D. Ala. Feb. 15, 2024).*

Fleeing on foot from a vehicle is a loss of any reasonable expectation of privacy in it. United States v. Holmes, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 6085 (8th Cir. Mar. 14, 2024).*

This entry was posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Abandonment, Waiver. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.