Category Archives: Franks doctrine

W.D.Va.: IAC claim over how to argue GFE fails

This 2255 petitioner argued his defense lawyer didn’t properly argue application of the good faith exception in the direct appeal, but doesn’t say how the case could have come out different. Also, the briefs and opinion on appeal show that … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Good faith exception, Ineffective assistance, Knock and announce, Probable cause | Comments Off on W.D.Va.: IAC claim over how to argue GFE fails

D.Kan.: Word processing error in affidavit didn’t make a Franks issue

The reference to another unknown person in the search warrant affidavit appears to be a word processing mistake and not a material false statement for Franks purposes. Denied. United States v. Moss, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 221619 (D.Kan. Nov. 17, … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Particularity | Comments Off on D.Kan.: Word processing error in affidavit didn’t make a Franks issue

E.D.Wis.: No hearing required on application of GFE; papers already show it

Defendant does not get a hearing on application of the good faith exception. The papers as a whole establish it for the government. The affidavit for the warrant showed sufficient information from observations for an inference that drugs were being … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Good faith exception | Comments Off on E.D.Wis.: No hearing required on application of GFE; papers already show it

S.D.N.Y.: Supposed Franks challenge really only expressing things for cross at trial

Defendant’s motion to reconsideration seems to raise a Franks-type challenge to the search which was not the focus of his original motion to suppress. What he raises “may be interesting cross-examination at trial, [but] they fail entirely to undermine the … Continue reading →

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: Supposed Franks challenge really only expressing things for cross at trial

CA3: Merely being on bail isn’t a seizure without serious restrictions

An employment dispute devolved into plaintiff’s arrest for theft of email and a claim of official misconduct. She was acquitted and sued. “Unlike the Appellants in Black or Gallo, Lentz did not experience any significant pretrial restrictions such as extensive … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Seizure, Waiver | Comments Off on CA3: Merely being on bail isn’t a seizure without serious restrictions

CA1: On a Franks claim based on omissions, add them in and retest for PC

With a Franks claim based on omissions, the court can consider the omissions and, if probable cause remains, the motion to suppress is denied. United States v. Leonard, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 32740 (1st Cir. Nov. 3, 2021). “Here, viewing … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA1: On a Franks claim based on omissions, add them in and retest for PC

CA9: “[T]he officer’s acknowledgment that he was looking for a reason to stop Ordaz does not contradict or otherwise undermine his testimony that he found one.”

“[T]he officer’s acknowledgment that he was looking for a reason to stop Ordaz does not contradict or otherwise undermine his testimony that he found one.” United States v. Ordaz, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 32449 (6th Cir. Oct. 29, 2021). Pre-Carpenter … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Good faith exception, Pretext | Comments Off on CA9: “[T]he officer’s acknowledgment that he was looking for a reason to stop Ordaz does not contradict or otherwise undermine his testimony that he found one.”

W.D.N.C.: Using a key to open a lockbox named in a SW rather than breaking it open is hardly unreasonable

Using defendant’s key to unlock a lockbox within the terms of the search warrant was not unreasonable. United States v. Frady, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 205784 (W.D.N.C. Oct. 26, 2021).* [Does he really expect that breaking into it is the … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Voluntariness, Warrant execution | Comments Off on W.D.N.C.: Using a key to open a lockbox named in a SW rather than breaking it open is hardly unreasonable

E.D.Tenn.: When def claims material information is omitted from an affidavit for SW it becomes a Franks claim even if def doesn’t want it to be

Defendant’s claim that material evidence was omitted from the affidavit for this search warrant is, at bottom, a Franks claim that requires an offer of proof and a substantial preliminary showing it would change the probable cause determination. He failed … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on E.D.Tenn.: When def claims material information is omitted from an affidavit for SW it becomes a Franks claim even if def doesn’t want it to be

D.Minn.: On “four corners review,” the affidavit is not misleading and it shows PC

On four corners review of the affidavit for search warrant, “This Court concludes that the statements made in the affidavit about Defendant living at the Euclid address were not untruthful or recklessly made; therefore, they permissibly allowed a judicial officer … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause | Comments Off on D.Minn.: On “four corners review,” the affidavit is not misleading and it shows PC

OH9: ‘A determination that reasonable suspicion exists, however, need not rule out the possibility of innocent conduct. Terry accepts the risk that officers may stop innocent people.’”

“‘A determination that reasonable suspicion exists, however, need not rule out the possibility of innocent conduct. Terry accepts the risk that officers may stop innocent people.’” State v. Kleintop, 2021-Ohio-3584, 2021 Ohio App. LEXIS 3493 (9th Dist. Oct. 6, 2021). … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion, Waiver | Comments Off on OH9: ‘A determination that reasonable suspicion exists, however, need not rule out the possibility of innocent conduct. Terry accepts the risk that officers may stop innocent people.’”

D.Mass.: Court sua sponte reconsiders denial of Franks challenge and grants it

The court sua sponte reconsiders its prior denial of a motion to suppress for a Franks violation and grants it. The critical paragraph in the affidavit identifying defendant was clearly misstated. United States v. Hallman, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 191780 … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on D.Mass.: Court sua sponte reconsiders denial of Franks challenge and grants it

E.D.Pa.: Multitude of facts supports nexus of evidence of robbery to def’s home

“Based upon the magnitude of the facts described in the search warrant affidavit, the issuing judge was justified in drawing a reasonable inference that physical evidence of Defendant’s alleged robberies would be found at his home. Defendant’s charged crimes, two … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Nexus | Comments Off on E.D.Pa.: Multitude of facts supports nexus of evidence of robbery to def’s home

E.D.Wis.: Threat to arrest high school student for social media post about Covid violates 1A

Officer’s threatening to arrest a high school student and her parents for disorderly conduct if she didn’t take down a social media post about her exposure to Covid violated the First Amendment. Cohoon v. Konrath, No. 20-cv-0620-BHL (E.D.Wis. Sept. 24, … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on E.D.Wis.: Threat to arrest high school student for social media post about Covid violates 1A

OH7: Visitor to hotel room with no key or shown association to room had no standing

Defendant was a visitor to a hotel room and he had no standing to challenge its search. He had no key to the room and no luggage or other belongings, and he couldn’t show he was a guest of either … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell site location information, Franks doctrine, Inventory, Standing | Comments Off on OH7: Visitor to hotel room with no key or shown association to room had no standing

SC authorizes video or phone oath and presentation of SW affidavits

Remote communication technology has been used for court proceedings under Covid. It is expressly authorized for many other proceedings, including issuance of search warrants. The swearing of the affiant can be remote. Use of Remote Communications Technology, 2021 S.C. LEXIS … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on SC authorizes video or phone oath and presentation of SW affidavits

M.D.La.: Evidentiary objection to product of search isn’t addressed in a suppression motion

Defendant’s argument is really an evidentiary objection, not a ground to suppress. Suppression is denied. United States v. Sterling, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160728 (M.D.La. Aug. 24, 2021). “Here, the credited testimony of all three officers is that Deputy Lowe … Continue reading →

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Consent, Franks doctrine, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on M.D.La.: Evidentiary objection to product of search isn’t addressed in a suppression motion

D.Nev.: Use of cell site simulator to track another’s phone leading to def was reasonable

The government’s use of a cell site simulator to track another person’s cell phone didn’t infringe on defendant’s rights. United States v. Goldsby, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160651 (D.Nev. Aug. 25, 2021). The court order (six years pre-Carpenter) showed probable … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell site location information, Cell site simulators, Consent, Franks doctrine, Reasonableness | Comments Off on D.Nev.: Use of cell site simulator to track another’s phone leading to def was reasonable

CA8: 38 seconds of additional questions of passenger while ticket being written didn’t unreasonably extend stop

The second officer on the scene did not materially extend the stop by 38 seconds of additional questioning of the passenger while the first officer was writing a ticket. United States v. Salkil, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 25511 (8th Cir. … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Good faith exception, Reasonableness, Standing | Comments Off on CA8: 38 seconds of additional questions of passenger while ticket being written didn’t unreasonably extend stop

CA7: Franks issue moot by other PC

A warrant wasn’t needed to seize a cell phone, but one was to search it, and they had one. Attacking the CI’s credibility fails as an issue, Franks or otherwise, because there is other probable cause for the warrant. United … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on CA7: Franks issue moot by other PC