Basham v. United States, No. 15-1980 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CasePetitioner, convicted of possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance, appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. 2255 motion, alleging that counsel was ineffective in failing to move to suppress the search of his cell phone data incident to arrest. At the time of defendant's arrest, there was no precedent from either the Eighth Circuit or the Supreme Court requiring a search warrant for the search of cell phone data incident to arrest. Applying the "strong presumption that counsel's conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance," the court concluded that counsel did not act constitutionally deficient in failing to file a motion to suppress. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Bye, Author, with Smith and Benton, Circuit Judges] Prisoner case - habeas. At the time of petitioner's arrest, there was no precedent from either the Eighth Circuit or the Supreme Court requiring police to obtain a search warrant to search a cell phone seized incident to arrest, and counsel's failure to anticipate and raise the issue in a motion to suppress did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. [ January 22, 2016
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.