S.D.Ohio: Withdrawing motion to suppress “pursuant to calculated strategy” not IAC

Defense counsel “withdrew the motion to suppress pursuant to calculated strategy,” so there is no Strickland failure of performance. Lee v. United States, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143372 (S.D. Ohio October 3, 2013). [Not every motion to suppress is worth pursuing, and many times the evidence illegally seized may even help the defense case. § 60.19 of the Fifth Edition.]

“The specificity, predictive value, and recency of Bracy’s tip are sufficiently strong to balance the flaws in Bracy’s personal credibility and reliability. A total evaluation of these factors shows that the informant tip was supported by sufficient ‘indicia of reliability’ to satisfy the reasonable suspicion requirements under Terry.” There ultimately was probable cause, and that moots the lack of consent claim. United States v. Powell, 732 F.3d 361 (5th Cir. 2013).*

Officers arrested suspects outside the house and then did a knock-and-talk which led to valid consent. It was then used as a valid protective sweep. United States v. Dangla-Sanchez, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143025 (W.D. Mo. October 3, 2013).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.