The first search warrant for defendant\u2019s phones was valid, and the government could have still used the phones as evidence. But, 29 months later, the government sought a second search warrant to look at the phone again, and found more information. The second search warrant was not unlawful, and the government was retaining possession of the cell phones anyway. United States v. Rodriguez, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15038 (D.Ore. February 6, 2015).*<\/p>\n
The reference to CIs in the affidavit for search warrants was only a part of the whole, and whether the CI was adequately corroborated fails under the good faith exception on the affidavit as a whole. United States v. Riley, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15332 (D.Md. February 4, 2015).*<\/p>\n
The 2255 is denied because petitioner can\u2019t show that he was prejudiced by defense counsel not challenging a consent search that would clearly lose because defendant\u2019s wife consented. United States v. Bass, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13808 (D.Colo. February 4, 2015).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The first search warrant for defendant\u2019s phones was valid, and the government could have still used the phones as evidence. But, 29 months later, the government sought a second search warrant to look at the phone again, and found more … Continue reading