The state CSLI warrant here (and noting the conflict in authorities) was deficient in its factual showing, but not so bad that the SW couldn\u2019t be relied upon in good faith. The fact the cell phone company\u2019s records were out of state does not present a constitutional problem. After all, it\u2019s obvious that technology has outpaced legislation. \u201cNevertheless, it is the undersigned’s opinion that the warrant at issue in this case, even if issued in contravention of the magistrate’s jurisdiction, was not so obviously deficient that a reasonably well-trained officer would have known of its illegality. Because the officers acted in good faith reliance on the warrant, suppression is not warranted based on any deficiencies in the warrant or the issuance thereof.\u201d Finally, failure to timely make the return to the clerk wasn\u2019t a ground for suppression. United States v. Gardner, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58670 (E.D.N.C. April 1, 2016), adopted 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58672 (E.D.N.C. May 2, 2016).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The state CSLI warrant here (and noting the conflict in authorities) was deficient in its factual showing, but not so bad that the SW couldn\u2019t be relied upon in good faith. The fact the cell phone company\u2019s records were out … Continue reading