{"id":5282,"date":"2011-12-21T13:18:36","date_gmt":"2011-03-14T00:05:27","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2011-03-13T10:07:39","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=5282","title":{"rendered":"CA11: Defendant should have been permitted to participate in co-defendant&#8217;s suppression hearing, but here there was no prejudice"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>While it is \u201ctroubling\u201d that this defendant was denied an opportunity to participate in the suppression hearing, there was no error in denying his motion to suppress on Franks grounds because there was an alternative ground to support the search. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.ca11.uscourts.gov\/opinions\/ops\/200913929.pdf\">United States v. Gamory<\/a>, 635 F.3d 480 (11th Cir. 2011).*<\/p>\n<p>Defendant was illegally detained, but the search warrant issued later was not the product of the detention. It was base416 Fed. Appx. 467416 Fed. Appx. 467d on an <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=9375691845261651263&amp;q=murray+v.+united+states&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,4\">independent source<\/a>. <a href=\"http:\/\/pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov\/opinion.pdf\/094774.U.pdf\">United States v. Fitzgerald<\/a>, 416 Fed. Appx. 238(4th Cir. 2011) (unpublished):<\/p>\n<p>In plaintiff\u2019s civil case against the search of his property, he made no showing that the magistrate issuing the warrant was not neutral and detached such that the warrant could not be relied on by the executing officers. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.ca5.uscourts.gov\/opinions%5Cunpub%5C10\/10-10760.0.wpd.pdf\">Grimes v. Thomason<\/a>, 416 Fed. Appx. 465 (5th Cir. 2011) (unpublished).*<\/p>\n<p>While the district court did not use the phrase \u201ccollective knowledge,\u201d the record supports that there was probable cause under the collective knowledge doctrine. This was reach under plain error. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.ca5.uscourts.gov\/opinions%5Cunpub%5C10\/10-10358.0.wpd.pdf\">United States v. Hooker<\/a>, 416 Fed. Appx. 467 (5th Cir. 2011) (unpublished).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=5282\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5282","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5282","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\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=5282"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5282\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=5282"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=5282"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=5282"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}