Plaintiff is an attorney pro se alleging, inter alia, a Fourth Amendment violation in Colorado against a member of the House of Representatives for the January 6th insurrection. He claims a Fourth Amendment in the \u201cpeople\u2019s house\u201d when he doesn\u2019t allege he was there. No standing. Even if he was, what\u2019s the reasonable expectation of privacy? Murphy v. Lamborn, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15146 (D.Colo. Jan. 27, 2022).* [And what did the Congressman do to keep him out of a public building under complete video surveillance.]<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This 2254 petitioner seeks to relitigate his search on habeas, and Stone bars that. Tarvin v. Sec’y, Dep’t of Corr., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15178 (M.D.Fla. Jan. 27, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2241 petitioner was convicted in a court martial and the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed. His ineffective assistance of counsel on all grounds fails, including allegations defense counsel failed to properly litigate his motion to suppress. Nothing he shows would change the outcome because the search claims were meritless. Bessmertnyy v. Kirk, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15428 (S.D.Cal. Jan. 27, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Plaintiff is an attorney pro se alleging, inter alia, a Fourth Amendment violation in Colorado against a member of the House of Representatives for the January 6th insurrection. He claims a Fourth Amendment in the \u201cpeople\u2019s house\u201d when he doesn\u2019t … Continue reading