Merely stating that an affidavit for search warrant was “false and misleading” doesn’t state a § 1983 civil Franks claim. Affordable Bail Bonds v. Tulsa County Sheriff’s Office, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75411 (N.D. Okla. May 3, 2019).
The respondent attorney’s self referral to the Disciplinary Board didn’t occur until after the search warrant was served on him as a result of his drug trafficking activities. Too little, too late, and disbarment ordered. Iowa Supreme Court Atty. Disciplinary Bd. v. Bauermeister, 2019 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 52 (May 4, 2019).*
Voluntariness for consent to search doesn’t require a Miranda-like warning under the Fourth Amendment or state constitution. There were warnings, and they told him what he was consenting to. “The motion judge’s determination is supported by the record. Although some warnings contained on the printed English form were not conveyed, the translation of the form included the key information that the police were asking to search the defendant’s residence and that, by signing the form, the defendant was giving them permission to do so. There was no evidence that the defendant’s will was overborne. The judge’s finding that the defendant’s consent was free and voluntary thus was not clearly erroneous.” Commonwealth v. Colon, 2019 Mass. LEXIS 242 (May 3, 2019).*