SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT DIRK GKEINEDER - Mass Cases

VIII.
3. Greineder was prejudiced by defense
counsel's blundera. . . . . . . . .
DEFENSE COUNSEL WAS INEFFECTIVE IN
FALLING TO FILE A MERITORIOUS MOTION
TO SUPPRESS THE NAILS RECEIPT. . . . . .
A. Statement of Relevant Facts. . . . . . .
B. Summary of Applicable Law. . . . . . . .
C. Application of Law to Facts. . . . . . .
1. The seizure of the nails receipt was
unconstitutional. . . . . . . . . .
2. The motion judge's ruling was
erroneous. . . . . . . . . . . . .
3. Counsel's failure to move to
suppress was prejudicial. . . . . .
IX. DEFENSE COUNSEL WAS INEFFECTIVE IN FAILING TO
FILE A MERITORIOUS MOTION TO SUPPRESS THE
FRUITS OF A SEARCH OF GREINEDER'S TOYOTA
AVALON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A. Statement of Relevant Facts. . . . . . .
B. Summary of Applicable Law. . . . . . . .
1. Scope of a residential search
warrant. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2. Limited exception to warrant
requirement for automobile searches.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C. Application of Law to Facta. . . . . . .
1. The search of the Toyota Avalon was
unlawful. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2. Counsel was deficient in failing to
file a motion to suppress. . . . .
3. The motion judge's reasoning was
flawed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
V
56
57
57
5a
58
58
59
60
60
60
60
60
61
61
61
62
63