Defendant in a fraud offense pled that federal regulators should have been cited in the affidavit for search warrant so the issuing magistrate will appreciate that this might not be a fraud. That\u2019s not the point of a search warrant. It\u2019s not trial on the merits. United States v. Dingle, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49867 (W.D. Mo. Jan. 18, 2021):<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Defendant first argues he is entitled to a Franks hearing because although the affidavits allege he was improperly obtaining federal set-aside contracts, they fail to cite the governing regulations and\/or statutes. He specifically maintains the affidavits should have included citations to 13 C.F.R. \u00a7\u00a7 124.105(c), 124.106, 125.11(g) and 38 U.S.C. \u00a7 8127, on grounds that the regulatory framework is complicated and would have helped Judge Hays “understand the complex interplay between the relevant statutes and regulations applicable to the small business concerns at issue, and thus, make an independent determination of whether there was probable cause to show that [Defendant’s] conduct constituted a federal crime.” This argument is misplaced.<\/p>
The search warrants seek evidence of wire fraud, false statements, conspiracy, major fraud against the United States, and money laundering, all offenses proscribed by Title 18 of the United States Code. See 18 U.S.C. \u00a7\u00a7 371, 1001, 1031, 1956, 1957. This is not a regulatory case. Citation to the Code of Federal Regulations thus was not necessary to the probable cause findings. Even so, the affidavits set forth the substance of the relevant regulations, including provisions on control, compensation and impermissible affiliation between two businesses. (Affidavits \u00b6\u00b6 11-18, 19-29) The Court, therefore, finds that Special Agent Tauai did not omit such regulations in reckless disregard for the truth.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant in a fraud offense pled that federal regulators should have been cited in the affidavit for search warrant so the issuing magistrate will appreciate that this might not be a fraud. That\u2019s not the point of a search warrant. … Continue reading