In US v. Cisneros-Gutierrez, No. 09-1890, the court of appeals affirmed defendant's drug and firearm conspiracy convictions, holding that 1) there was no credible evidence that the police were physically intimidating or made any promises in exchange for consent to search a residence; 2) as to the police's entry into another residence, an objectively reasonable police officer, knowing the information supplied by an informant and observing defendants' conduct, would conclude that there was danger of removal or destruction of evidence of a crime; and 3) the knock-and-talk that was conducted in this case was a reasonable and proper investigative strategy that did not foreseeably increase the likelihood of the destruction of evidence.
Christenson v. Ault, No. 09-2312, involved a habeas petition in a burglary and kidnapping prosecution. The court of appeals affirmed the denial of the petition, holding that 1) petitioner procedurally defaulted his claim of a Brady violation; and 2) trial counsel did not breach any professional duty in declining to independently investigate whether he received all photographs from the government.
- Full Text of US v. Cisneros-Gutierrez, No. 09-1890
- Full Text of Christenson v. Ault, No. 09-2312
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.