While the “four corners” rule is the standard for evaluating probable cause, the court may go outside the four corners in applying the good faith exception. Here, the officer had additional information he didn’t include because he’d reasonably thought he’d shown probable cause. This is not the kind of case that Herring expects suppression in. This was a reasonable miscalculation and not a deliberate withholding. Moreover, that which was withheld was inculpatory and not exculpatory. United States v. Lipscomb, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146767 (E.D. Va. Aug. 28, 2019) (this hearing was ordered here):
Although all of the facts necessary to reach this conclusion were not set forth in Lacy’s search warrant affidavit, such facts were well-known to Lacy at the time he applied for the search warrant. Importantly, Lacy did not misrepresent any facts or information to the state magistrate. Lacy therefore possessed a reasonable, good faith belief that the search warrant application he submitted to search the electronic devices in the Defendant’s residence was supported by probable cause. See Leon, 468 U.S. at 923 (the good faith exception to the warrant requirement applies if the officer relying on the warrant could reasonably believe that the search warrant application he submitted to the magistrate establishes probable cause for the search). Accordingly, the good faith exception to the warrant requirement applies in this case, and the evidence recovered on the basis of Lacy’s November 14, 2018 search warrant application need not be suppressed, even though such application was held by this court to lack probable cause. The Defendant’s Motion to Suppress is DENIED.