Defense counsel \u201cwithdrew the motion to suppress pursuant to calculated strategy,\u201d so there is no Strickland failure of performance. Lee v. United States, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143372 (S.D. Ohio October 3, 2013). [Not every motion to suppress is worth pursuing, and many times the evidence illegally seized may even help the defense case. \u00a7 60.19 of the Fifth Edition.]<\/p>\n
\u201cThe specificity, predictive value, and recency of Bracy\u2019s tip are sufficiently strong to balance the flaws in Bracy\u2019s personal credibility and reliability. A total evaluation of these factors shows that the informant tip was supported by sufficient \u2018indicia of reliability\u2019 to satisfy the reasonable suspicion requirements under Terry.\u201d There ultimately was probable cause, and that moots the lack of consent claim. United States v. Powell<\/a>, 732 F.3d 361 (5th Cir. 2013).*<\/p>\n Officers arrested suspects outside the house and then did a knock-and-talk which led to valid consent. It was then used as a valid protective sweep. United States v. Dangla-Sanchez, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143025 (W.D. Mo. October 3, 2013).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading