Shinstock v. Mississippi

by
Ronald Shinstock appealed after he was convicted of selling methamphetamine conviction. He argued the trial court should have excluded some of the State’s evidence based on an alleged Fourth Amendment violation. Shinstock conceded he never asserted a Fourth Amendment claim in the trial court. The Mississippi Supreme Court found he forfeited that issue. And the record did not support a finding of plain error. The record also did not sufficiently support Shinstock’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. View "Shinstock v. Mississippi" on Justia Law