DE: Def counsel’s failure to challenge PC and particularity in cell phone search warrants post-conviction relief

Defendant sufficiently stated grounds for ineffective assistance of counsel from defense counsel’s failure to challenge the search warrant for lack of probable cause and particularity. “Postconviction relief due to ineffectiveness of counsel must be granted in circumstances where the Court finds trial counsel’s efforts fell below reasonable standard but for those errors, the outcome of the proceeding would have been different. Those challenging hurdles were met here. For the foregoing reasons, Jordan’s Motion is GRANTED.” State v. Jordan, 2024 Del. Super. LEXIS 486 (June 28, 2024).*

No suppression hearing was required where defendant pointed to no factual disputes in the papers and didn’t request a hearing. Jenkins-Alexie v. State, 2024 Alas. App. LEXIS 86 (July 3, 2024).* (unpublished)

“Because law enforcement may obtain a search warrant for chemical testing as an alternative to invoking the statutory implied consent procedure and doing so does not offend due process or equal protection, the district court erred by suppressing the breath test result. The defendant was not in custody such that he had to be advised of his Miranda rights before answering questions during a traffic stop. Because there was no violation of his constitutional rights, the district court erred by suppressing the defendant’s statements. We therefore reverse the suppression ruling and remand for further proceedings.” State v. Mullen, 2024 Iowa App. LEXIS 518 (July 3, 2024).*