Defendant\u2019s motion to suppress goes to the extreme of denying any connection to the vehicle searched in an apparent effort to not be linked at trial, and that means no standing. United States v. Littlejohn, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 214718 (W.D. N.C. Dec. 21, 2018). One would surmise defense counsel knew this was the outcome, but it was solely for pleading a defense to the charge.<\/p>\n
\u201cBut by pleading guilty, Lane waived all non-jurisdictional challenges to the constitutionality of his conviction, including claims of ineffective assistance based on pre-plea events.\u201d He couldn\u2019t raise his search claim by ineffective assistance of counsel in a 2255. United States v. Lane, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 215660 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 20, 2018).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant\u2019s motion to suppress goes to the extreme of denying any connection to the vehicle searched in an apparent effort to not be linked at trial, and that means no standing. United States v. Littlejohn, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 214718 … Continue reading