W.D.Ky.: Franks challenge fails because of complete lack of materiality

Moreover, Perkins did not — and cannot — make a preliminary showing that any alleged ‘false statement or material omission [was] necessary to the probable cause finding in the affidavit.’ If the Court were to strike every contested statement from the affidavit, the following facts would remain: …” United States v. Perkins, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53762 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 27, 2020).*

Petitioner “claims that counsel should have argued that the search warrant was not supported by probable cause, and that the affiant omitted material facts from the warrant application. When a defendant’s claim of ineffectiveness is based on counsel’s failure to file a motion to suppress, a defendant must ‘prove the motion was meritorious.’ … Mr. Jones has not done so, as the warrant was amply supported by probable cause.” “The affidavit here contained abundant support for a finding that a search of the phone was likely to uncover evidence of a crime.” United States v. Jones, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53088 (N.D. Ind. Mar. 27, 2020).*

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

Comments are closed.