Defendant was the subject of an NIT (Playpen) search warrant years ago and was convicted. In a successor habeas he argues that \u201cChatGPT’s \u2018opinion\u2019 that the magistrate judge participated in a crime by issuing the NIT warrant does not make Jones’s proposed claim newly discovered.\u201d It\u2019s not. He always knew about the Playpen warrant. In re Jones, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 17669 (6th Cir. June 17, 2026).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Probable cause was shown for this warrant for information on defendant\u2019s cash app and social media accounts in a drug case. There is probable cause on the totality. \u201cHer complaints focus on what is not contained in the Affidavits rather than considering how the information demonstrates the supportive role Bogan is alleged to have played in the conspiracy. It is not necessary for a participant in a drug trafficking conspiracy to be directly involved in acquiring or delivering the controlled substances.\u201d United States v. Bogan, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136564 (E.D. Mo. May 8, 2026).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant was the subject of an NIT (Playpen) search warrant years ago and was convicted. In a successor habeas he argues that \u201cChatGPT’s \u2018opinion\u2019 that the magistrate judge participated in a crime by issuing the NIT warrant does not make … Continue reading