Constitutionality of Stop-Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Jacob Lickers v. United States of America

Case No.: 22-1179

Officials: Wood, Scudder, and St. Eve, Circuit Judges.

Focus:  Constitutionality of Stop-Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

Lickers was convicted of transporting and possessing child pornography based on evidence discovered on his devices, seized during a traffic stop and subsequent arrest for drug possession. Although a state court warrant initially authorized the search, it later deemed the stop and arrest unconstitutional, suppressing the evidence. However, federal authorities conducted a second search under a federal warrant without acknowledging the state court’s ruling.

Lickers’ attorney challenged the, the arrest, and the adequacy of the state search warrant in lower courts, resulting in the suppression of all evidence and subsequent dismissal of state charges. Yet, these arguments proved unsuccessful in federal court, leading Lickers to plead guilty while preserving the right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress. He was sentenced to concurrent terms of 132 months’ imprisonment on each count.

On appeal, Lickers contended that his trial and appellate counsel provided ineffective assistance by neglecting to argue that the federal agent acted in bad faith by omitting the state court’s suppression ruling from the federal warrant application. However, the court disagreed, finding the connection between the state court’s ruling and the federal warrant application too distant to mandate exploring the possibility of bad faith. Thus, it affirmed the district court’s denial of relief.

Affirmed.

Decided 04/12/24

Full Text