Failure to call witnesses at defendant\u2019s child pornography sentencing relating to the legality of the search and seizure in the beginning of the case was not ineffective assistance. They couldn\u2019t add anything at sentencing. Cottle v. United States, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153711 (E.D.Ky. Nov. 13, 2015).<\/p>\n
Despite the fact the trial court suppressed evidence in an alleged mortgage banking fraud case, the persons obtaining the warrant have qualified immunity. The officers obtaining the warrant were not \u201cplainly incompetent.\u201d Frost v. Delaney<\/a>, 2015 N.H. LEXIS 125 (Nov. 17, 2015).*<\/p>\n Defendant was arrested for a drug offense, and police came to his house and obtained voluntary consent from his wife to search it. United States v. Smith, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154661 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 16, 2015).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Failure to call witnesses at defendant\u2019s child pornography sentencing relating to the legality of the search and seizure in the beginning of the case was not ineffective assistance. They couldn\u2019t add anything at sentencing. Cottle v. United States, 2015 U.S. … Continue reading