CA5: Alleged violations of the Posse Comitatus Act must be “widespread and repeated” to justify suppression

Alleged violations of the Posse Comitatus Act, here by AFOSI, must be “widespread and repeated” to justify suppression. Defendant didn’t show this was. United States v. Salinas, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 28616 (5th Cir. Sept. 9, 2020).

“A detective assigned to a DEA task force signed an affidavit in support of a warrant to search a townhome. The affidavit contained errors and omissions, and a prosecutor submitted it to the magistrate judge without catching or correcting the errors. The judge approved the warrant and the search turned up incriminating evidence against defendant Calvin Carter. He moves to suppress the evidence and, at a minimum, requests a hearing to challenge the warrant under Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978).” The false statements and the omissions about what was done or not done don’t undermine the probable cause. The search warrant was based on controlled buys. And the good faith exception applies, too. United States v. Carter, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164423 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 9, 2020).*

This entry was posted in Exclusionary rule, Franks doctrine. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.