2255 petitioner fails to show grounds for a CoA from his search claims, without telling us the rationale. United States v. Renteria, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 30239 (5th Cir. Nov. 26, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s stop and frisk was without reasonable suspicion. He was in an area known for car break-ins but he didn\u2019t do anything. State v. Dyson, 2024-Ohio-5591 (2d Dist. Nov. 26, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defense counsel wasn\u2019t ineffective for not challenging the search warrant for defendant\u2019s cell phone. Green v. State, 2024 Fla. App. LEXIS 9207 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 27, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A broken taillight lens justified defendant\u2019s stop because white light was coming out. State v. Mendez, 2024 Kan. LEXIS 107 (Nov. 27, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2255 petitioner claimed late developed information would have supported a Franks challenge before trial. Notwithstanding all that, there still was probable cause. United States v. Robinson, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 216040 (E.D. Ky. Nov. 27, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Plaintiff was strip searched under a warrant, and his claim of mental anguish fails. Vizcarrondo v. City of Yonkers, 2024 NY Slip Op 51619(U) (Westchester Co. Nov. 27, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cPlaintiff alleges that he was arrested pursuant to a facially invalid warrant, \u2026 and that he was unlawfully detained for twenty-two days. \u2026 He contends that this arrest violated his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure and his Fourteenth Amendment rights. \u2026 Plaintiff seeks \u2018an award of punitive damages against Defendants for their violations of [his] rights pursuant to the United States Constitution.\u2019\u201d This is a new Bivens context and rejected. Taylor v. United States, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 216218 (D.S.C. Oct. 4, 2024).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant was an Amazon driver suspected of mail robberies. In his vehicle was a postal key, mail with others\u2019 names, and a cell phone plugged in that had his picture on the screen. USPIS showed probable cause for the warrant for the phone. The fact there was a CI who was reluctant to ID himself was of less significance because it was nearly all corroborated. United States v. Smith-Ellis, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 216228 (E.D. Mich. Nov. 27, 2024).* [At least the police revealed the CI was reluctant.]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
2255 petitioner fails to show grounds for a CoA from his search claims, without telling us the rationale. United States v. Renteria, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 30239 (5th Cir. Nov. 26, 2024).* Defendant\u2019s stop and frisk was without reasonable suspicion. … Continue reading