Source: http://oh.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20180405_0001327.SOH.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2019-04-18 21:11:40+00:00

Document:
JEFF NOBLE, Warden, adison Correctional Institution Respondent.
Ground One: Trial court incorrectly overruled Appellant's Motion to Suppress.
Supporting Facts: § 6:6 Noncognizable constitutional claims (2007 edition Habeas Corpus) (1) Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465, 494-95 . . . to the 4th Amendment rule prohibiting the warrantless entry and the search and seizure of a person's house unreasonable. SPD [Springfield Police Department] officers proceeded into residence in search of fugitive. Officer then proceeded into basement opening a cigar box where suspected to find cocaine. Putting the substance back into the box, he then told another officer who explained he needed a search warrant. Not at the residence at the time of the search, Mr. Norris was apprehended immediately upon his arrival at the house. Remedies by my lawyer were brought to the suppression hearing on this issue. Also the testimony under oath by Officer Phillips initial findings conflicted with his affidavit perjuring [sic] his integrity of facts.
Ground Two: Trial court incorrectly allowed heresay [sic] evidence, unable to confront witness.
Supporting Facts: § 6:6 Noncognizable constitutional claims (2) Withrow v. Williams, 507 U.S. 680, 683 . . . (1993). Trial court incorrectly allowed heresay [sic] evidence denying appelant [sic] his right to confront a witness against him. The trial court allowed the State to introduce evidence in the form of phone text messages that were allegedly sent between Appellant and other unknown parties. The State did not bring in these other parties unknown nor did they bring in anyone from the cellular service provide to testify to the records.
Ground Three: § 7:4 Relationship between 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on 4th Amendment claims.
Supporting Facts: Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90 . . . (1980). Arresting officer Mr. Phillips illegally searched small areas when specifically told by superiors not to. Then fabricating the occurrence to obtain search warrant and later commiting [sic] perjury on the witness stand under oath with a conflicting story.

References: § 6
 v. 
 § 6
 v. 
 § 7
 § 2254
 § 1983
 v.