S.D.Ill.: Govt’s affidavits knock-and-announce would be unsafe were unrebutted

Defendant pled in his motion to suppress there was a knock-and-announce violation, and the government responded with affidavits that knocking would be unsafe. Unrebutted, that’s enough to deny a hearing. United States v. Moore, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155454 (S.D. Ill. Aug. 27, 2020).

Defendant challenges the probable cause for the search warrant here, but the court recounts the wealth of information [and it isn’t even close]. “In sum, there is simply no merit whatsoever to Holland’s claim that Trooper Panchik’s affidavit, on its face, fails to supply probable cause to search 269 Cumberland Street. The detailed and thorough affidavit leaves no doubt that “the magistrate had a substantial basis for … concluding that probable cause existed.’ Miknevich, 638 F.3d at 182 (alteration in original) (quoting Gates, 462 U.S. at 238-39).” Even his Franks challenge fails because, removing the allegedly offending information, there is plenty of probable cause. United States v. Holland, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155041 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 25, 2020).*

This entry was posted in Knock and announce, Probable cause. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.