It’s not prosecutorial misconduct to present evidence allegedly unlawfully seized to a grand jury. That was settled in Calandra in 1974. United States v. Boston, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23751 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 14, 2018).
“Accordingly, the court finds that the officers lacked probable cause to arrest Defendant prior to any pat down of his person and seizure of the cellular telephones. The record also does not support a search of Defendant’s person and seizure of the cellular telephones on any other grounds. For these reasons, the court finds that Defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights were violated by his arrest and the subsequent search of his person and the seizure of his cellular telephones. Defendant, therefore, seeks suppression of the cellular telephones and the evidence obtained from the subsequent search of the telephones. [Doc. 57].” And that is granted. United States v. McRoy, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24176 (N.D. Ga. Jan. 22, 2018) (R&R).*