CSLI warrant upheld: \u201c The cell site data obtained by the government is admissible because the government’s actions did not constitute a \u2018search\u2019 falling under the protection of the Fourth Amendment. Even if the government had violated the Fourth Amendment, its good faith reliance on binding appellate precedent and a search warrant would make suppression of the data inappropriate.\u201d United States v. Moore, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149199 (E.D.Pa. Oct. 27, 2016).*<\/p>\n
2255 petitioner\u2019s claim that defense counsel didn\u2019t properly attack credibility of the officer about reasonable suspicion fails. Counsel\u2019s witness examination was \u201cpersistent\u201d and adequate, and \u201cBecause the tape could not do what Reidy claims it does, and because counsel did ensure that Judge Ostby and the appellate court viewed it, he does not show that counsel’s performance was unreasonable.\u201d United States v. Reidy, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147887 (D.Mont. Oct. 24, 2016).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
CSLI warrant upheld: \u201c The cell site data obtained by the government is admissible because the government’s actions did not constitute a \u2018search\u2019 falling under the protection of the Fourth Amendment. Even if the government had violated the Fourth Amendment, … Continue reading