CA1: Omission of the CI’s criminal history was only negligent for Franks purposes

The affiant’s omission of the CI’s criminal history was only negligent and didn’t undermine the probable cause showing. United States v. Francis, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6795 (1st Cir. Mar. 24, 2025).

Some of evidence here was discovered before any illegality, so the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine doesn’t apply to that. The trial court erred in dismissing the whole case. State v. Brinson, 2025 Fla. App. LEXIS 2267 (Fla. 6th DCA Mar. 21, 2025).*

Flight is not per se suspicious, but officers had reasonable suspicion here when they approached him. One said they had a warrant for his arrest, but didn’t. Whether this was a mistake or a lie doesn’t matter here because there was reasonable suspicion. Defendant fled and was finally tackled and apprehended. United States v. Hamilton, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6783 (9th Cir. Mar. 24, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Attenuation, Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.