ID: Comment on the refusal to consent here was harmless error

Defendant was accused of battery of a woman, and, when the police arrived, he refused to consent to police entry because he didn’t want them to see her. Assuming, arguendo, that this was clear constitutional error, there was plenty of other evidence admitted without objection proving the same thing. Thus, “Carmouche has not shown that the testimony referencing his exercise of his Fourth Amendment rights, and the prosecutor’s brief comment on this testimony, affected the outcome of the trial proceedings. We conclude the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.” State v. Carmouche, 2013 Ida. App. LEXIS 87 (November 21, 2013).

2255 petitioner consented to seizure and search of his computer, so the unsupported claim that the government searched it and lied about it has no merit. It appears that it was never searched. Hargrove v. United States, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 166361 (N.D. W.Va. September 18, 2013).*

Petitioner’s IAC allegation that defense counsel didn’t order the transcript of the suppression hearing alleges nothing about performance. State ex rel. Adkins v. Dingus, 2013 W. Va. LEXIS 1339 (November 21, 2013).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.