Category Archives: Franks doctrine

D.Mass.: Def satisfied Franks to get a hearing on the statements being intentionally or recklessly false

Defendant satisfied his Franks burden of a substantial preliminary showing of recklessness on the informant’s reliability to get a hearing. The court is persuaded in part because of the weak showing of nexus. Still, however, defendant’s burden at the Franks … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on D.Mass.: Def satisfied Franks to get a hearing on the statements being intentionally or recklessly false

CA5: “I don’t know, it’s not my vehicle” is a disavowal of standing

“Rather than establishing an expectation of privacy, Beasley expressly disavowed ownership of the vehicle, saying, ‘I don’t know, it’s not my vehicle.’ Because he disclaimed ownership of the vehicle, the district court appropriately determined that Beasley lacked any expectation of … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Standing | Comments Off on CA5: “I don’t know, it’s not my vehicle” is a disavowal of standing

E.D.N.Y.: Lack of a DL doesn’t deny standing in a borrowed car

Defendant had standing to challenge the stop and search of a car he’d borrowed with permission of the owner despite the lack of a driver’s license, but he loses on the merits. United States v. Zimmerman, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS … Continue reading →

Posted in Abandonment, Franks doctrine, Private search, Standing | Comments Off on E.D.N.Y.: Lack of a DL doesn’t deny standing in a borrowed car

WaPo: Ex-FBI lawyer, accused of falsifying document in probe of Trump’s campaign, to plead guilty

WaPo: Ex-FBI lawyer, accused of falsifying document in probe of Trump’s campaign, to plead guilty by Matt Zapotosky and Devlin Barrett:

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on WaPo: Ex-FBI lawyer, accused of falsifying document in probe of Trump’s campaign, to plead guilty

CA6: Alleged false statement to get an arrest warrant overcame QI

Alleged false statement to get an arrest warrant overcame qualified immunity. Tlapanco v. Elges, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 25595 (6th Cir. Aug. 12, 2020). The state failed to show exigent circumstances excused obtaining a search warrant for defendant’s BAC. Commonwealth … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Drug or alcohol testing, Emergency / exigency, Franks doctrine, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA6: Alleged false statement to get an arrest warrant overcame QI

AZ: Offer of proof would be helpful for Franks claim, and def didn’t make one here

“As noted above, however, some of these alleged omissions and misstatements are simply not supported by the record. And, the omissions that are supported by the record were not material given the strength of the evidence supporting a finding of … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell site location information, Exclusionary rule, Franks doctrine, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on AZ: Offer of proof would be helpful for Franks claim, and def didn’t make one here

AK: Omission was maybe reckless but PC on the remainder

The officer’s omission of the CI’s criminal charges from the affidavit for the search warrant was reckless at worst, but the totality of the affidavit showed the CI’s potential motives for providing information. Moreover, there was probable cause even without … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause | Comments Off on AK: Omission was maybe reckless but PC on the remainder

CA10: Parolee’s § 1983 claim he was wrongfully arrested on parole doesn’t state a claim because he’s always “in custody”

Plaintiff’s claim that he was unreasonably arrested for a parole violation before actually getting on parole is rejected because a parolee is still in custody no matter what. “Similarly, there is no authority to support Mr. Neilsen’s argument that an … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on CA10: Parolee’s § 1983 claim he was wrongfully arrested on parole doesn’t state a claim because he’s always “in custody”

Reason: Grand Jury Indictments Paint a Picture of Deadly Deceit in Houston Narcotics Division

Reason: Grand Jury Indictments Paint a Picture of Deadly Deceit in Houston Narcotics Division by Jacob Sullum (“The charges, which grew out of a lethal 2019 raid based on a fraudulent search warrant affidavit, suggest that cops routinely built their … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on Reason: Grand Jury Indictments Paint a Picture of Deadly Deceit in Houston Narcotics Division

MI: Flint water crisis case states claim for due process violation of bodily integrity

The suit over the City of Flint water crisis stated a claim, inter alia, for a due process violation of bodily integrity. Mays v. Snyder, 2020 Mich. LEXIS 1351 (July 29, 2020) (plurality). The A.F. Ct. Crim. App. erred in … Continue reading →

Posted in Due process, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on MI: Flint water crisis case states claim for due process violation of bodily integrity

D.Ore.: Illegibility of judge’s signature on SW not 4A violation

Just because the state trial judge’s signature was illegible doesn’t violate the Fourth Amendment. The judge’s name was stamped below. United States v. McElroy, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132608 (D. Ore. July 24, 2020). Franks challenge fails: “Thus, the bottom … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on D.Ore.: Illegibility of judge’s signature on SW not 4A violation

CA6: Def showed no REP in package with a fake name sent to his house

Defendant showed no reasonable expectation of privacy in a package addressed to a fake name at his address. United States v. James, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 22766 (6th Cir. July 21, 2020). Defendant failed to show that the challenged statements … Continue reading →

Posted in Anticipatory warrant, Automobile exception, Franks doctrine, Mail and packages | Comments Off on CA6: Def showed no REP in package with a fake name sent to his house

CA8: Mistake of name in SW affidavit deleted by district court wasn’t material

The affidavit for search warrant here originally used the name “Aaren” but the officer found “Taylor” could be the last name, and the affidavit was changed for that. It turned out that there were two people. The district court properly … Continue reading →

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Arrest or entry on arrest, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on CA8: Mistake of name in SW affidavit deleted by district court wasn’t material

PA: State waived challenge to def’s reliance on state constitution

The state waived its challenge to the defendant’s reliance on the state constitution by failure to litigate it below. Waiver claims have to be applied evenhandedly between the state and defendants. Commonwealth v. Wolfel, 2020 Pa. LEXIS 3797 (July 21, … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Nexus, State constitution, Waiver | Comments Off on PA: State waived challenge to def’s reliance on state constitution

CA6: Not telling officers during arrest and transport of pre-existing injury gives them QI

“Detroit police arrested Baxter Jones for disorderly conduct. They transported Jones, who uses a wheelchair, in a modified cargo van. Jones says riding in the van aggravated his spinal injuries and hurt his shoulders and hands. The district court denied … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA6: Not telling officers during arrest and transport of pre-existing injury gives them QI

N.D.Ohio: Mere desire to cross-examine about the drug dog’s bona fides isn’t a Franks issue

Merely wanting to cross-examine about the reliability of the drug dog isn’t a Franks challenge. There still has to be a “substantial preliminary showing” of a falsity, and desire to cross-examine isn’t it. United States v. Robinson, 2020 U.S. Dist. … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: Mere desire to cross-examine about the drug dog’s bona fides isn’t a Franks issue

D.Minn.: Motion to suppress denied for lack of specificity

Defendant’s motion to suppress is denied for lack of specificity. United States v. Zuniga-Garcia, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122220 (D. Minn. June 24, 2020). There was probable cause for the search warrant, despite the claimed Franks violation which was not … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Motion to suppress denied for lack of specificity

CA3 still doesn’t adopt standard of review for Franks challenges

The Third Circuit notes that it has yet to adopt a standard of review for Franks claims; see United States v. Pavulak, 700 F.3d 651, 665-66 (3d Cir. 2012); and it doesn’t have to here because, whichever applies, defendant loses. … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion, Standards of review | Comments Off on CA3 still doesn’t adopt standard of review for Franks challenges

MA: When seizing digital devices under SW, looking at camera pictures didn’t require exclusion where not mentioned in SW for camera

During a search of defendant’s house under a warrant that included seizing digital devices, the officer turned on a camera and scrolled through the pictures. When the warrant was sought for the camera, no mention was made, and inevitable discovery … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Inevitable discovery, Probable cause | Comments Off on MA: When seizing digital devices under SW, looking at camera pictures didn’t require exclusion where not mentioned in SW for camera

D.Minn.: Late night stop, no DL, digital scale on floor is RS

This late night stop was reasonably extended because the driver didn’t have a DL on him and there appeared to be a digital scale on the floor. United States v. Henry, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115939 (D. Minn. May 20, … Continue reading →

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Late night stop, no DL, digital scale on floor is RS