Johnson v. U.S.

Dist. Ct. erred in denying defendant's motion under 28 USC section 2255 seeking to challenge his drug distribution conviction based on claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to seek suppression of crack cocaine seized from borrowed vehicle that defendant had driven. Defense counsel's decision not to file motion to suppress was based on misperception that defendant did not have reasonable expectation of privacy in borrowed vehicle in which he was driver, as well as faulty premise that defendant could not claim both privacy interest in vehicle, as well as lack of knowledge about contents of said vehicle. Moreover, remand was required for evidentiary hearing to determine whether defendant actually gave consent to search vehicle, and whether police had reasonable suspicion to question defendant prior to conducting instant search.