FL2: Suppression under Franks reversed; not material to PC

Defendant established that there were false statements in the affidavit for warrant that ran the full spectrum from negligence to likely intentionality. But probable cause remained, even excluding what was challenged. “While the temptation to advance the prophylactic purpose of the exclusionary rule by disincentivizing heedless and irresponsible law enforcement conduct may be understandable, in this case the falsities in the affidavit do not negate a finding of probable cause.” The trial court’s granting of relief under Franks is reversed. State v. Domenech, 2024 Fla. App. LEXIS 973 (Fla. 2d DCA Feb. 9, 2024).

There was a reasonable likelihood that a motion to suppress would have been successful to quash defendant’s arrest. Therefore, the case is remanded for a hearing on his ineffective assistance of counsel claim. People v. Page, 2024 IL App (1st) 220830 (Feb. 7, 2024).*

The probable cause for the search is for the place where evidence might be found, and it is not based on who owns it. Defendant only challenges probable cause and not nexus. State v. Walker, 2024-Ohio-484 (2d Dist. Feb. 9, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Nexus, Probable cause. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.