Category Archives: Franks doctrine

N.D.Iowa: RS and PC for stop and then search, so justification for drug dog is irrelevant

Based on two bases of collective knowledge, the officer had justification for a stop and a search, so the justification for the drug dog isn’t even relevant. United States v. Carter, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45275 (N.D. Iowa Mar. 5, … Continue reading

Posted in Collective knowledge, Dog sniff, Franks doctrine, Standing | Comments Off on N.D.Iowa: RS and PC for stop and then search, so justification for drug dog is irrelevant

W.D.Pa.: Younger doctrine didn’t apply when plaintiff’s criminal case was over

Younger doctrine didn’t apply when plaintiff’s criminal case was over. Harris v. Trent, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42416 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 2, 2026). “Here, assuming the factual disputes in Franke’s favor, the relevant question is whether it was clearly established … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: Younger doctrine didn’t apply when plaintiff’s criminal case was over

E.D.Mich.: Typo in SW affidavit didn’t justify Franks hearing

A single error in a warrant affidavit that should be characterized as a typo and not a false statement doesn’t justify a Franks hearing. United States v. McClain, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39891 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 26, 2026). Defendant had … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Drug or alcohol testing, Franks doctrine, Mail and packages, Standing | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Typo in SW affidavit didn’t justify Franks hearing

CA6: Ptf’s expert in a civil Franks claim only provided a legal conclusion, and “That’s not enough”

Plaintiff in a civil Franks claim failed to show that the officer knowingly misrepresented facts. Of note, however, is that he used an expert witness on falsity which essentially only provided a legal conclusion. Chancellor v. Geelhood, 2026 U.S. App. … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on CA6: Ptf’s expert in a civil Franks claim only provided a legal conclusion, and “That’s not enough”

CA6: Administrative search that is a ruse for a criminal search was clearly established as 4A violation

An administrative search that is a ruse for a criminal search was clearly established at the time this one happened. Qualified immunity denied. Generis Ent., LLC v. Donley, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 5197 (6th Cir. Feb. 19, 2026). Not the … Continue reading

Posted in Abandonment, Administrative search, Franks doctrine, Pretext | Comments Off on CA6: Administrative search that is a ruse for a criminal search was clearly established as 4A violation

techdirt: It Looks Like The FBI Straight Up Lied To A Judge To Get Permission To Seize Georgia Voting Records

Begging the question: What consequences are there for a Franks violation, besides a Franks hearing and maybe just suppression of evidence? Or here, return of the evidence? Rebuke? Prosecution for false statement or worse? See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 (false … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on techdirt: It Looks Like The FBI Straight Up Lied To A Judge To Get Permission To Seize Georgia Voting Records

M.D.Fla.: SW return filed outside state law time limit isn’t a Franks issue

A search warrant return outside the state law time limit by law is not a Franks issue. United States v. Davis, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33100 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 18, 2026). Plaintiff “fails to specifically address, and thus waives any … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine, GPS / Tracking Data, Warrant papers | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: SW return filed outside state law time limit isn’t a Franks issue

IA approves residence indicia warrant

This was a search warrant for indicia of defendant’s residence. State v. Uranga, 2026 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 20 (Feb. 13, 2026) (§ 56.18 n.2). Defendant was tried in 2012 and if his counsel had made a motion to suppress cell … Continue reading

Posted in Cell site location information, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on IA approves residence indicia warrant

CNN: Fulton County accuses Justice Department of misleading the judge who approved elections office search warrant

CNN: Fulton County accuses Justice Department of misleading the judge who approved elections office search warrant by Tierney Sneed (“Officials in Fulton County, Georgia, accused the Justice Department of making “serious” omissions in the application the FBI filed to obtain … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on CNN: Fulton County accuses Justice Department of misleading the judge who approved elections office search warrant

M.D.Fla.: In a 2254, court can decide petitioner loses on merits or deny relief on Stone, as it chooses

2254 petitioner loses on the merits of his Fourth Amendment claim, and the court can opt to do that or apply Stone and not decide it. Evans v. Sec’y, Dep’t of Corr., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29920 n.2 (M.D. Fla. … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: In a 2254, court can decide petitioner loses on merits or deny relief on Stone, as it chooses

OH4: Inventory found pretextual

The inventory here was found pretextual by the way the officer conducted it; e.g., not using gloves until something was found [which says nothing to me]. State v. Clark, 2026-Ohio-447, 2026 Ohio App. LEXIS 510 (4th Dist. Feb. 5, 2026). … Continue reading

Posted in Administrative search, Franks doctrine, Inventory, Pretext, Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off on OH4: Inventory found pretextual

OH12: Officer’s reasonable mistake on traffic violation didn’t void stop

Did defendant violate the turn signal ordinance by not signaling his turn until already stopped? It doesn’t matter. “Ultimately, though, we need not decide whether Bryant actually violated the turn-signal ordinance. Even if the answer is unclear, Officer Singleton’s stop … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonableness | Comments Off on OH12: Officer’s reasonable mistake on traffic violation didn’t void stop

ID: Potential for destruction of evidence on cell phone was justification for its seizure

Defendant was reported for video voyeurism of his stepdaughter in the bathroom, and police got his phone, telling him they were seizing it. Then they got a warrant. The potential for destruction of evidence was sufficient justification for a warrantless … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Emergency / exigency, Franks doctrine, Prison and jail searches, Strip search | Comments Off on ID: Potential for destruction of evidence on cell phone was justification for its seizure

CA9: No QI for knowingly presenting material false testimony in support of a warrant

No qualified immunity for knowingly presenting material false testimony in support of a warrant. Gibson v. City of Portland, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 2646 (9th Cir. Jan. 29, 2026). As to Franks: “Even if there were a material omission, inclusion … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Franks doctrine, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA9: No QI for knowingly presenting material false testimony in support of a warrant

IL: Failure to conduct a preliminary hearing for PC mooted by conviction

Failure to conduct a preliminary hearing to establish probable cause is mooted by defendant’s conviction after trial. People v. Chambliss, 2026 IL 130585, 2025 Ill. LEXIS 7 (Jan. 23, 2026). “Lucas claims that Rubenstahl violated her Fourth Amendment right to … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on IL: Failure to conduct a preliminary hearing for PC mooted by conviction

KS: Geofence warrant valid under GFE

This geofence warrant was valid by the good faith exception. State v. Mitchell-Pennington, 2026 Kan. App. LEXIS 6 (Jan. 23, 2026). The omitted facts merely clarified, not defeated, probable cause. The motion to suppress was properly denied. Urrutia v. State, … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Cell phones, Consent, Franks doctrine, geofence, Good faith exception | Comments Off on KS: Geofence warrant valid under GFE

CA7: Stop at night in a high crime area and furtive movements justified protective sweep of car

Defendant was stopped in a high crime area at night, and his furtive movements in the car justified a protective sweep of the car. United States v. Erving, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 1377 (7th Cir. Jan. 20, 2026).* Defendant’s car … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Franks doctrine, Protective sweep, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA7: Stop at night in a high crime area and furtive movements justified protective sweep of car

WA: SW at 6 am, ziptied, questioned, but told he wasn’t under arrest is still custody

Defendant was in custody for Miranda when a warrant was executed at his house at 6 am and he was taken outside, separated from his family, and ziptied but told he was not under arrest. State v. Magana-Arevalo, 2026 Wash. … Continue reading

Posted in Curtilage, Custody, Franks doctrine, Seizure | Comments Off on WA: SW at 6 am, ziptied, questioned, but told he wasn’t under arrest is still custody

MA: Missing juvenile in BOLO was subject to community caretaking function

On a traffic stop, the juvenile was recognized from a BOLO as missing. That then involved the community caretaking function. Commonwealth v. Demos D., 2026 Mass. LEXIS 6 (Jan. 13, 2026). There was reasonable suspicion for stopping plaintiff where he … Continue reading

Posted in Community caretaking function, Franks doctrine, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on MA: Missing juvenile in BOLO was subject to community caretaking function

E.D.Okla.: Def’s high speed chase was PC

Defendant’s high speed chase was probable cause. “Defendant’s egregious eluding combined with his throwing an object from his vehicle combine to establish probable cause to search the Defendant’s vehicle under the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement.” United … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on E.D.Okla.: Def’s high speed chase was PC