{"id":19138,"date":"2015-10-09T09:45:19","date_gmt":"2015-10-09T14:45:19","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=19138"},"modified":"2015-10-12T08:41:16","modified_gmt":"2015-10-12T13:41:16","slug":"mo-omission-from-affidavit-that-ci-was-working-off-a-case-not-material-its-virtually-a-given","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=19138","title":{"rendered":"MO: Omission from affidavit that CI was &#8220;working off a case&#8221; not material&#8211;it&#8217;s virtually a given"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>An alleged material omission for Franks purposes was not material because adding it in would essentially be misleading. Telling the issuing magistrate that the CI was \u201cworking off a case\u201d isn\u2019t really required under Franks because that\u2019s usually a given they take into consideration. The officer did not have to actually state the lighting conditions because the affidavit mentioned it was at night and he \u201cbelieved\u201d he saw a hand to hand drug deal, not actually saw one. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.courts.mo.gov\/file.jsp?id=92874\">State v. Turner<\/a>, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 1033 (October 6, 2015).<\/p>\n<p>Defendant abandoned a tote bag he left behind when he fled from a wrecked motor scooter when fleeing from the police. United States v. Ritchie, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136963 (W.D. Mo. Sept. 14, 2015),* adopted 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136012 (W.D.Mo. Oct. 6, 2015).*<\/p>\n<p>Officers went to a motel room in a minor sex trafficking investigation. The door was ajar 2&#8243; and the knock caused it to inadvertently open farther such that there was a glimpse of the minor females inside. That created exigency for the entry. United States v. Shingles, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136195 (M.D.Fla. October 6, 2015),* R&#038;R 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138285 (M.D.Fla. June 18, 2015).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>An alleged material omission for Franks purposes was not material because adding it in would essentially be misleading. Telling the issuing magistrate that the CI was \u201cworking off a case\u201d isn\u2019t really required under Franks because that\u2019s usually a given &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=19138\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[48,21,44],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-19138","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-abandonment","category-franks-doctrine","category-informant-hearsay"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19138","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=19138"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19138\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":19174,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19138\/revisions\/19174"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=19138"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=19138"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=19138"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}