\u201cA defendant may not take an interlocutory appeal from an order denying a motion to suppress evidence. Di Bella v. United States, 369 U.S. 121, 123-24, 82 S. Ct. 654, 7 L. Ed. 2d 614 (1962).\u201d So, defense counsel\u2019s failure to appeal wasn’t IAC. Defendant can\u2019t show defense counsel was ineffective for not challenging the search of cell phones because any motion to suppress would have failed because of the independent source doctrine. The alleged unconstitutional search defendant relies on was independent. United States v. Hudson, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65365 (N.D. Fla. March 24, 2017), adopted and COA denied, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65363 (N.D. Fla. Apr. 28, 2017).<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s stop for riding a bicycle against traffic without a headlight at night was reasonable. His furtive movements after the stop justified a frisk. United States v. Morgan<\/a>, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 7744 (10th Cir. May 2, 2017).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" \u201cA defendant may not take an interlocutory appeal from an order denying a motion to suppress evidence. Di Bella v. United States, 369 U.S. 121, 123-24, 82 S. Ct. 654, 7 L. Ed. 2d 614 (1962).\u201d So, defense counsel\u2019s failure … Continue reading