Defendant contends that the search of his vehicle was without his consent, and defense counsel was ineffective for not raising that issue. The court finds as a fact that defendant never mentioned that to defense counsel, therefore, counsel couldn\u2019t be ineffective. Shipp v. United States, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61842 (E.D. Wis. May 5, 2014)* (effectively adopting contributory negligence).<\/p>\n
Defendant clearly consented to these searches. \u201cAs to the search of his cell phone, vehicle, thumb drive and one email account, Russ consented to those searches. See Fernandez v. California, 134 S.Ct. 1126, 1132 (2014) (quoting Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 228 (1973) (“Consent searches are part of the standard investigatory techniques of law enforcement agencies and are a constitutionally permissible and wholly legitimate aspect of effective police activity.”). United States v. Russ, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61978 (E.D. Tex. April 2, 2014).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant contends that the search of his vehicle was without his consent, and defense counsel was ineffective for not raising that issue. The court finds as a fact that defendant never mentioned that to defense counsel, therefore, counsel couldn\u2019t be … Continue reading