D.D.C.: It doesn’t violate Franks to fail to mention a Miranda violation to gain def’s admissions (no violatIon either)

Officers had probable cause for a warrantless arrest of defendant for child pornography. “But Mr. Lieu argues that the names ‘Dave’ and ‘John’ are relatively common names and that the clothing description is too general to support the connection that the agents made. Mr. Lieu’s argument fails to recognize, however, that the standard of probable cause ‘deals with probabilities and depends on the totality of the circumstances.’ Pringle, 540 U.S. at 371.” The arrest being valid, the seizure of his cell phone from his person was reasonable. Also, it doesn’t violate Franks for the officers to fail to say that defendant’s statement was obtained in violation of Miranda because it doesn’t undermine the probable cause. There was, however, no Miranda violation. United States v. Lieu, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21017 (D. D.C. Feb. 8, 2018).

There was probable cause for defendant’s arrest, and, on the totality, he consented to a buccal swab. United States v. Welch, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19766 (D. Minn. Feb. 7, 2018),* R&R 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20876 (D. Minn. Jan. 2, 2018).*

This entry was posted in DNA, Franks doctrine. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.