CA4: Where materiality fails under Franks, falsity doesn’t matter

The district court concluded that there was no false statement for Franks purposes, but that doesn’t even have to be decided. It certainly wasn’t material. Hedgepeth v. Nash Cty., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 10868 (4th Cir. May 6, 2025).*

It was reasonable for the officer to stop to assist a motorist alone at night parked with the flashers on. The vehicle wasn’t there a little earlier. Reasonable suspicion developed. State v. Acres, 2025-Ohio-1592 (9th Dist. May 5, 2025).*

“Without a threat, weapon, or suspected crime, police officers couldn’t reasonably believe that the Fourth Amendment would allow them to shoot Mr. Martinez.” Ibarra v. Lee, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 10764 (10th Cir. May 5, 2025).* Similar language: Gould v. Guerriero, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 10791 (11th Cir. May 5, 2025).*

Search of defendant’s apartment a month after a carjacking was reasonable and with probable cause. Police continued investigating and linked the apartment to the stolen car. A machine gun found inside was not suppressed. United States v. Lewis, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84616 (D. Md. May 5, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Excessive force, Franks doctrine, Nexus, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.