2255 petitioner\u2019s claims include one that the search should have been suppressed for state officers not leaving a copy of the search warrant at the site of the search. That\u2019s not a constitutional defect. It’s a Rule 41 requirement, but this is a state search warrant, and it hardly ever leads to suppression. Miller v. United States, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159708 (E.D. Mo. Sept. 18, 2019).<\/p>\n
Defendant raises his search issue again in a motion for new trial. Still, nothing shows he had standing in the vehicle, and nothing\u2019s changed since the prior denial. United States v. Littlejohn, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158658 (W.D. N.C. Sept. 18, 2019).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
2255 petitioner\u2019s claims include one that the search should have been suppressed for state officers not leaving a copy of the search warrant at the site of the search. That\u2019s not a constitutional defect. It’s a Rule 41 requirement, but … Continue reading