Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Fourth Amendment

Criminal Law

: Fourth Amendment

OH: IAC claim must consider that defense counsel determined that it was not in defendant's best interest to pursue suppression motion

By John Wesley Hall, Jr.

Under the Strickland deferential standard of client performance, the court should consider that defense counsel has a reason for not pursuing a suppression, such as the fact that the officers may testify to thinks not in the reports which harm defendant's position. State v. Greathouse, 2008 Ohio 3023, 2008 Ohio App. LEXIS 2552 (8th Dist. June 12, 2008): "A failure to file a motion to suppress may constitute ineffective assistance of counsel where there is a solid possibility that the court would have suppressed the evidence. [Citation omitted.] However, even when some evidence in the record supports a motion to suppress, we presume that defense counsel was effective if defense counsel could reasonably have decided that the filing of a motion to suppress would have been a futile act...continue to full post

Full post as published by Fourth Amendment on June 26, 2008 (boomark / email).