When the Franks challenge is more of a different interpretation of facts, it doesn\u2019t suffice. \u201cAnd, frankly, Defendant is just arguing that a different interpretation should be placed on his conduct than Agent Cunningham’s interpretation – or most likely the interpretation of the officers at the scene and relayed to the agent – without providing any basis for the court to find that the agent intentionally or with reckless disregard misstated Defendant’s conduct the morning of November 21, 2013. The court does not even find that this statement is misleading much less included by the agent either intentionally or with deliberate recklessness.\u201d United States v. Bates, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116197 (N.D. Ga. June 1, 2017), adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115908 (N.D. Ga. July 24, 2017).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
When the Franks challenge is more of a different interpretation of facts, it doesn\u2019t suffice. \u201cAnd, frankly, Defendant is just arguing that a different interpretation should be placed on his conduct than Agent Cunningham’s interpretation – or most likely the … Continue reading