\u201cDefendant accurately points out that Officer Delk failed to include in his affidavit details about the possibility of retaliatory gang violence and Defendant’s presence at the Merriweather house. \u2026 But the Court should not engage in \u2018line-by-line scrutiny of the warrant application’s affidavit.\u2019 United States v. Williams, 544 F.3d 683, 686 (6th Cir. 2008). The affidavit should be judged \u2018on the adequacy of what it does contain, not on what it lacks, or what a critic might say should have been added.\u2019 United States v. Allen, 211 F.3d 970, 975 (6th Cir. 2000).\u201d United States v. Presley, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99411 (S.D. Ohio May 26, 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe above information was more than sufficient to establish probable cause to search 1427 W. 84th Street for illegal drugs. In an attempt to defeat this conclusion, Jenkins attempts to remove the individual facts provided by McNamara and examine them without any additional context.\u201d No; it must be the totality. United States v. Jenkins, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99346 (N.D. Ohio May 26, 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Alleged omissions in the search warrant for defendant\u2019s iCloud account don\u2019t undermine the probable cause. The omissions were directed to credibility of CIs but weren\u2019t materially helpful on that question. Moreover, that person\u2019s reports cannot be viewed in isolation. United States v. Ray, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99789 (S.D. N.Y. May 26, 2021).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cDefendant accurately points out that Officer Delk failed to include in his affidavit details about the possibility of retaliatory gang violence and Defendant’s presence at the Merriweather house. \u2026 But the Court should not engage in \u2018line-by-line scrutiny of the … Continue reading