D.Me.: Alleged statutory violation doesn’t warrant exclusionary rule

In a search of medical records, records were seized in excess of the scope of a prior Patient Records Order for information other than patient drug abuse, but that did not warrant suppression here because the Fourth Amendment was not violated. A statutory violation alone doesn’t warrant suppression. United States v. Norris, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76033 (D. Me. Apr. 26, 2024).*

“However, the Appellants attempt to frame the rights they assert as ‘straight forward and well established: the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure, the right to bodily integrity, the right to privacy, and the right to equal protection under the laws.’ … The Appellants’ framing is the type of ‘broad general proposition’ that does not pass muster under the qualified immunity inquiry and is too abstract to provide guidance to reasonable state officials. Saucier, 533 U.S. at 201.” Wright-Gottshall v. New Jersey, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 10158 (3d Cir. Apr. 26, 2024).*

Defendant established a prima facie case of a Franks violation that significant information was omitted. It, however, was not material to the probable cause finding. United States v. Norris, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76032 (D. Me. Apr. 26, 2024).*

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

Comments are closed.