Defendant was taken to the ER for gunshot wounds. The hospital staff took his clothes and looked in his pockets and then turned them over to the police. This was a private search. United States v. Coleman, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 230 (N.D. Miss. Jan. 2, 2025).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The district court decided defendant\u2019s search claim on inevitable discovery by inventory; the search incident claim didn\u2019t have to be decided. That was correct. United States v. Wilder, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 32843 (4th Cir. Dec. 30, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The government\u2019s late disclosure of a DNA expert is excused. Defendant knew there was a DNA search warrant long ago, and he confessed. No prejudice. United States v. Bauer, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 234369 (D.N.M. Dec. 30, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s 2255 claim defense counsel was ineffective for not challenging the search of another\u2019s property based on controlled buys is rejected. United States v. Wilbourn, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 234424 (N.D. Ind. Dec. 20, 2024).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant was taken to the ER for gunshot wounds. The hospital staff took his clothes and looked in his pockets and then turned them over to the police. This was a private search. United States v. Coleman, 2025 U.S. Dist. … Continue reading