Defendant pled and didn\u2019t appeal denial of his motion to suppress. Therefore, he had a \u201cfull and fair opportunity to litigate\u201d to conclusion and waived. Stone v. Powell applies to 2255’s. Cadet v. United States, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174028 (N.D.Ga. Sept. 4, 2015).<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s IAC argument for not filing a motion to suppress was based on his own mistake of law, and it was properly denied. Lewis v. State<\/a>, 2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 109 (Tex. App. \u2013 Houston (14th Dist.) Jan. 7, 2016).<\/p>\n There was no clear error that the officers exceeded the scope of consent for the search. The record is not clear and suggests a lack of defendant\u2019s standing in the first place because it was his girlfriend\u2019s apartment and he was hiding there, not staying there. United States v. Brown<\/a>, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 166 (4th Cir. Jan. 5, 2016).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Defendant pled and didn\u2019t appeal denial of his motion to suppress. Therefore, he had a \u201cfull and fair opportunity to litigate\u201d to conclusion and waived. Stone v. Powell applies to 2255’s. Cadet v. United States, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174028 … Continue reading