\u201cJohnson challenges his counsel’s investigation of the charged crime and his counsel’s failure to investigate the officer involved in the search warrant, surveillance, and collection of evidence. An allegation of \u2018inadequate investigation does not warrant habeas relief absent a proffer of what favorable evidence or testimony would have been produced.\u2019 Beaver v.Thompson, 93 F.3d 1186, 1195 (4th Cir. 1996). Beyond general allegations that the police \u2018tainted his case,\u2019 Johnson does not identify what the favorable evidence or testimony would have been. Accordingly, counsel did not render deficient performance in not pursuing Johnson’s speculative claims. See id. at 1196.\u201d Johnson v. United States, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 195481 (D. Md. Oct. 21, 2020).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Two officers were involved in the stop, and the dog sniff here didn\u2019t unreasonably extend the stop. [Factually, however, this case is substantially similar to Gates where defendant was suspected of regularly renting cars to run drugs to the Florida panhandle every couple of weeks, and that was at least reasonable suspicion.] United States v. Ingram, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 195066 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 19, 2020).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cJohnson challenges his counsel’s investigation of the charged crime and his counsel’s failure to investigate the officer involved in the search warrant, surveillance, and collection of evidence. An allegation of \u2018inadequate investigation does not warrant habeas relief absent a proffer … Continue reading