Category Archives: Franks doctrine

MA: “Freezing” house for alleged prostitution for alleged exigency was unreasonable

Police “froze” a house and searched the second floor for evidence of alleged prostitution; couldn’t be justified on this record. What physical evidence would there be? Commonwealth v. Owens, 480 Mass. 1034 (Nov. 7, 2018). There was a mistake in … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on MA: “Freezing” house for alleged prostitution for alleged exigency was unreasonable

N.D.Ga.: Car not abandoned by fleeing def because a co-def stayed with it

A car is not abandoned by the defendant merely because, when he fled, a confederate stayed behind. United States v. Gibbs, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187572 (N.D. Ga. Nov. 2, 2018). The audio recording of the police-citizen interaction has enough, … Continue reading

Posted in Abandonment, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on N.D.Ga.: Car not abandoned by fleeing def because a co-def stayed with it

D.Md.: Omitted information that supported PC belies the officer was attempting to mislead as to a mistake in the affidavit

The failure to include the date of uploading of child pornography images wasn’t known to the officer at the time the search warrant was obtained, so the officer did not mislead the magistrate issuing the warrant. The misstatement of the … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on D.Md.: Omitted information that supported PC belies the officer was attempting to mislead as to a mistake in the affidavit

D.Kan.: After a Franks hearing, PC exists despite omitted information

Defendant was under investigation for threatening to use a weapon of mass destruction. After the search, police found child pornography, too. He filed a Franks motion about omitted information and got a hearing. The court finds probable cause and no … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause | Comments Off on D.Kan.: After a Franks hearing, PC exists despite omitted information

CA11: Affiant’s not putting what he thought from CI was false didn’t violate Franks

The officer declined to put the CI’s inconsistent statements in that he thought were false. This didn’t violate Franks, and there was probable cause anyway. United States v. King, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 30122 (11th Cir. Oct. 25, 2018):

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on CA11: Affiant’s not putting what he thought from CI was false didn’t violate Franks

TX14: Two prior searches for blood constitutionally or statutorily didn’t need to be mentioned in affidavit for third

Defendant was in a car wreck that killed another at 1 am, New Years Day 2014. There were three blood draws: one for medical purposes at the hospital, one directed by the police at the hospital, and one after a … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Inevitable discovery | Comments Off on TX14: Two prior searches for blood constitutionally or statutorily didn’t need to be mentioned in affidavit for third

MA: Justification for no-knock shown by risk of destruction of evidence because def’s apartment on 3d floor with locked outside door

A no-knock entry to prevent destruction of evidence was justified by the fact defendant’s apartment was on the third floor and police had to navigate a locked first floor door before they got to his apartment. Commonwealth v. Silva, 2018 … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Knock and announce | Comments Off on MA: Justification for no-knock shown by risk of destruction of evidence because def’s apartment on 3d floor with locked outside door

N.D.Ind.: Franks requires attaching affidavit to the motion to suppress

Defendant’s Franks request for an evidentiary hearing without attaching the affidavit for the search warrant is denied without prejudice. The court has nothing to compare. United States v. Carswell, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165132 (N.D. Ind. Sep. 26, 2018). The … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on N.D.Ind.: Franks requires attaching affidavit to the motion to suppress

CA9: Police supervisor’s alleged after-the-fact acquiescence in an alleged illegal search isn’t a § 1983 claim

A police supervisor’s post-hoc alleged acquiescence that he didn’t participate in an alleged illegal search doesn’t state a claim against the supervisor. Hunt v. Davis, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 26265 (9th Cir. Sep. 17, 2018). The officers corroborated enough of … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA9: Police supervisor’s alleged after-the-fact acquiescence in an alleged illegal search isn’t a § 1983 claim

OH9: Probable hand-to-hand drug deal from car was RS for stop

Potential hand-to-hand drug deal in a car was reasonable suspicion for a stop. It’s what these officers were always looking for. [It may have ultimately had an innocent explanation, but it looked like it to them.] State v. Dunlap, 2018-Ohio-3658, … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on OH9: Probable hand-to-hand drug deal from car was RS for stop

E.D.Cal.: Def succeeds in a Franks challenge

Defendant succeeds in a Franks challenge. Removing the offending portions leaves no probable cause. United States v. Kastis, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148480 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 31, 2018):*

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on E.D.Cal.: Def succeeds in a Franks challenge

MA: Even if some information in CSLI affidavit was incorrect or false, redacting it still leaves PC

The search warrant for defendant’s CSLI was based on probable cause. Defendant challenges parts of the information as wholly inadequate to show probable cause. Redacting that information, however, still leaves probable cause. Commonwealth v. Robertson, 2018 Mass. LEXIS 563 (Aug. … Continue reading

Posted in Cell site location information, Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on MA: Even if some information in CSLI affidavit was incorrect or false, redacting it still leaves PC