\u201cHere, the affidavit easily meets the standard of probable cause. Defendants would require a level of skepticism that is not appropriate to the oversight at this juncture. The scheme to defraud was amply established by the affiant and so was the link to KSC. [\u00b6] Frankly, somewhat more troubling is the argument that the warrant lacked particularity as to the items to be seized, despite the length of the list. Ultimately, however, the court concludes that the warrant did not lack particularity as to the items to be seized.\u201d United States v. Verzaleno, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124691 (D. Md. July 16, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cDefendant admits, both in briefing and at oral argument, that the warrant application established probable cause to conclude that (1) he committed the subject offenses; (2) he resided at the La Madre residence; and (3) at least some of his employees worked at the Charleston office. He admits also that the agent’s affidavit established a nexus between the searched premises and defendant and his business. Instead, defendant hangs his hat on the argument that the warrant application did not establish a nexus between the searched premises and defendant’s alleged offenses sufficient to justify a finding of probable cause. But defendant’s argument implicitly both overstates the extent of the protection afforded by the Fourth Amendment and understates the strength of the showing made to Magistrate Judge Ferenbach in the search warrant application.\u201d \u201cThus, a sufficient nexus between the alleged criminal activities and the place to be searched \u2018does not require direct evidence and may be based on reasonable inference from the facts presented based on common sense and experience.\u2019\u201d United States v. Zeitlin, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124589 (S.D.N.Y. July 15, 2024).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cHere, the affidavit easily meets the standard of probable cause. Defendants would require a level of skepticism that is not appropriate to the oversight at this juncture. The scheme to defraud was amply established by the affiant and so was … Continue reading