Category Archives: Franks doctrine

D.C.Cir.: Omission of robbery victim’s failure to ID def didn’t cut either way in Franks analysis; PC still existed

Omission of a non-identification of defendant as a robber was not material for Franks. “Even viewing the omitted non-identification as a material omission, probable cause for the search did not rise or fall on the identification of Dorman as the … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on D.C.Cir.: Omission of robbery victim’s failure to ID def didn’t cut either way in Franks analysis; PC still existed

M.D.N.C.: SW for stolen tractor lawn mower didn’t support plain view in house of firearm

A search warrant for a stolen tractor lawn mower didn’t support a plain view in defendant’s house for alleged illegal firearms because they aren’t per se unlawful to possess. They could have been registered. United States v. White, 2017 U.S. … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on M.D.N.C.: SW for stolen tractor lawn mower didn’t support plain view in house of firearm

M.D.Pa.: Def’s matching citizen informant’s description and location was RS, and his flight was PC

The detailed description given by a 911 calling citizen informant was reasonable suspicion when defendant was seen matching the description. When police approached him, defendant ran, and that was probable cause. United States v. King, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88514 … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause | Comments Off on M.D.Pa.: Def’s matching citizen informant’s description and location was RS, and his flight was PC

W.D.Va.: Misstatement of crack v. powder cocaine wasn’t Franks violation

In a 2255 case, it wasn’t ineffective assistance for defense counsel to fail to make a Franks challenge to a misstatement of crack v. powder cocaine in a search warrant application. United States v. Moyer, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79279 … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on W.D.Va.: Misstatement of crack v. powder cocaine wasn’t Franks violation

MI: Taking ptf’s photo and prints after a valid arrest did not violate 4A

The taking of plaintiff’s photograph and fingerprints after an apparently valid arrest was not a clearly established violation of the Fourth Amendment where he was innocent of a crime. Plaintiff did not contest his arrest, but he contended that the … Continue reading →

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Franks doctrine, Qualified immunity, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on MI: Taking ptf’s photo and prints after a valid arrest did not violate 4A

CA1: Misstatement Alpha-PVP was in package instead of Alpha-PHP was not material nor in bad faith

The affidavit for search warrant was based on a customs search of a package destined for delivery in Maine that the contents was Alpha-PVP, which is how it looked and field tested as MDMA. Later lab analysis showed it was … Continue reading →

Posted in Automobile exception, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on CA1: Misstatement Alpha-PVP was in package instead of Alpha-PHP was not material nor in bad faith

N.D.Ga.: The Franks doctrine applies only to factual misstatements, not legal conclusions

Following United States v. Barnes, 126 F. Supp. 3d 735, 740 (E.D. La. 2015), the Franks doctrine applies only to factual misstatements, not legal conclusions. United States v. Tabares, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186540 (N.D.Ga. June 3, 2016), adopted, 2017 … Continue reading →

Posted in DNA, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on N.D.Ga.: The Franks doctrine applies only to factual misstatements, not legal conclusions

D.S.C.: Motorcycle owner’s GPS tracked to def’s backyard; no Franks violation in the SW affidavit because it was really backyard

The owner of a motorcycle had a GPS tracker on it, and he reported to the police that it was pinging at defendant’s address. Defendant’s claim that the affidavit for the search warrant for defendant’s address violated Franks because the … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Particularity | Comments Off on D.S.C.: Motorcycle owner’s GPS tracked to def’s backyard; no Franks violation in the SW affidavit because it was really backyard

W.D.N.Y.: SW materials not yet releasable because investigation is ongoing; defense can get it later

The search warrant materials in this case are not released yet because the case is still pretrial and there is investigative and CI information that shouldn’t be disclosed yet. “In evaluating a common law claim of access to judicial documents, … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on W.D.N.Y.: SW materials not yet releasable because investigation is ongoing; defense can get it later

E.D.N.C.: Omission from affidavit that 5 prior searches of def’s home found nothing wasn’t material where PC was shown yet again

Omission from the affidavit for search warrant that five prior searches at defendant’s residence for drugs had proved fruitless was not material where there was a separate showing of probable cause for this search warrant. The good faith exception also … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on E.D.N.C.: Omission from affidavit that 5 prior searches of def’s home found nothing wasn’t material where PC was shown yet again

D.Mass.: Evidence that officer condoned CI planting evidence survives MSJ

Plaintiff had enough evidence of CI misconduct in planting evidence and police turning a blind eye toward it to survive summary judgment. Santiago v. Lafferty, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49177 (D. Mass. March 31, 2017):

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Franks doctrine, Police misconduct | Comments Off on D.Mass.: Evidence that officer condoned CI planting evidence survives MSJ

IL: Franks falsity applies to the officer, not the CI; also, the CI testified before the issuing magistrate, and that bolsters credibility

“The deliberate falsity or reckless disregard of the truth applies only to the affiant—here, Officer Ramirez—and not to any nongovernmental informant like Rodriguez. … What is more, we note that both Officer Ramirez and Rodriguez appeared before the issuing judge, … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on IL: Franks falsity applies to the officer, not the CI; also, the CI testified before the issuing magistrate, and that bolsters credibility

D.Del.: Evasiveness during a public intox arrest justified Terry frisk

Defendant was arrested for public intox and he became evasive including a request that his name not be run for warrants. That justified a Terry frisk. United States v. King, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40213 (D. Del. March 21, 2017).* … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on D.Del.: Evasiveness during a public intox arrest justified Terry frisk

E.D.Cal.: Def satisfies Franks burden to get a hearing because nexus in affidavit for SW is weak

Defendant satisfies the Franks preliminary showing of false or misleading statements about alleged victims to get a Franks hearing. The nexus requirement of the affidavit is just barely met, and the hearing could undermine the probable cause showing. United States … Continue reading →

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on E.D.Cal.: Def satisfies Franks burden to get a hearing because nexus in affidavit for SW is weak

CA10: Considering info omitted from SW affidavit, there was still PC and outcome wouldn’t change

There was probable cause for plaintiff’s arrest based on a co-conspirators statement. Omitted information was considered by the district court on the probable cause question, and this court agrees it wouldn’t change anything. Claeys v. Mohr, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause | Comments Off on CA10: Considering info omitted from SW affidavit, there was still PC and outcome wouldn’t change

S.D.Fla.: No Franks hearing: The omitted would only have added to PC

Defendant isn’t entitled to a Franks hearing: “The addition of the omitted information to the search warrant application would not have detracted from the probable cause and may very well have strengthened the probable cause stated in the affidavit.” United … Continue reading →

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on S.D.Fla.: No Franks hearing: The omitted would only have added to PC

CA5: Ptf loses on his civil Franks claim because of a lack of materiality to PC

The affidavit for arrest warrant failed to include information that would undermine the credibility of the police informant, but the court finds that the omission was not material and there was other information that supported probable cause. Therefore, the officer … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA5: Ptf loses on his civil Franks claim because of a lack of materiality to PC

CA6: Franks challenges subject to clearly erroneous standard of review; here, materiality not shown

The District Court’s findings under Franks are subject to the clear error standard of review. Here, the officer learned a new fact between the wiretap application and the search warrant application, and there is some surface appeal to apply Franks. … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine, Standards of review | Comments Off on CA6: Franks challenges subject to clearly erroneous standard of review; here, materiality not shown

M.D.Fla.: Franks challenge requires proffer by affidavit, not merely representations by counsel

Franks challenge requires an offer of proof by affidavit. Representations of counsel aren’t enough. United States v. Houston, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 558 (M.D.Fla. Jan. 4, 2017). After dealing with all the allegations:

Posted in Burden of proof, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: Franks challenge requires proffer by affidavit, not merely representations by counsel

CA6: Where affidavit for SW referenced defendant’s arrests it was true: no duty to investigate how they came out

In the PC showing for a search warrant, the affiant doesn’t have to investigate every arrest of the defendant shown in a records check to determine outcomes that there was no convictions. The affiant didn’t assert convictions. At the suppression … Continue reading →

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on CA6: Where affidavit for SW referenced defendant’s arrests it was true: no duty to investigate how they came out