CA9: Police have no duty to put all facts in affidavit for search warrant; the question is probable cause, not proof of guilt

In a case involving the arrest of persons actually innocent, the police failure to include every known fact in an arrest affidavit did not show that they made a misstatement that misled the magistrate. Also, a prosecutor reviewed the papers before filing. Ewing v. City of Stockton, 588 F.3d 1218 (9th Cir. 2009)*:

The Ewings contend that the officers omitted other information casting doubt on Shirk’s identification of Heather. But “[t]he government need not include all of the information in its possession to obtain a search warrant …. The omission of facts rises to the level of misrepresentation only if the omitted facts ‘cast doubt on the existence of probable cause.'” United States v. Johns, 948 F.2d 599, 606-07 (9th Cir. 1991) (quoting United States v. Dennis, 625 F.2d 782, 791 (8th Cir. 1980)); see also United States v. Streich, 759 F.2d 579, 586 (7th Cir. 1985) (noting that Illinois v. Gates does not require officers to apprise a judicial officer of everything); United States v. Luciano, 785 F. Supp. 878, 881 (D. Mont. 1991) (“Certainly, an investigating officer cannot be expected to include the sum total of all of his investigation in the affidavit supporting a search warrant.”). None of the details appellants cite cast doubt on the existence of probable cause.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.