Defendant\u2019s habeas claim that state law wasn\u2019t followed in issuing a search warrant doesn\u2019t state a 2254 claim. [Aside from Stone v. Powell, of course.] Roland v. Sec’y, Dept. of Correction, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40581 (N.D. Fla. Mar. 13, 2019).<\/p>\n
There was probable cause for the state search warrant based on the officer\u2019s own information and observations. Moreover, there was a citizen informant whose information was corroborated. \u201c On the basis of that surveillance, Furlong prepared an affidavit and application that was reviewed by the county attorney and approved by a state judge. Under these circumstances, Furlong acted in good-faith when he carried out a search pursuant to the warrant.\u201d Therefore, the good faith exception applied. United States v. StewartUnited States v. Stewart<\/a>United States v. Stewart, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 7344 (8th Cir. Mar. 13, 2019).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Defendant\u2019s habeas claim that state law wasn\u2019t followed in issuing a search warrant doesn\u2019t state a 2254 claim. [Aside from Stone v. Powell, of course.] Roland v. Sec’y, Dept. of Correction, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40581 (N.D. Fla. Mar. 13, … Continue reading