Category Archives: Franks doctrine

MA: Missing juvenile in BOLO was subject to community caretaking function

On a traffic stop, the juvenile was recognized from a BOLO as missing. That then involved the community caretaking function. Commonwealth v. Demos D., 2026 Mass. LEXIS 6 (Jan. 13, 2026). There was reasonable suspicion for stopping plaintiff where he … Continue reading

Posted in Community caretaking function, Franks doctrine, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on MA: Missing juvenile in BOLO was subject to community caretaking function

E.D.Okla.: Def’s high speed chase was PC

Defendant’s high speed chase was probable cause. “Defendant’s egregious eluding combined with his throwing an object from his vehicle combine to establish probable cause to search the Defendant’s vehicle under the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement.” United … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on E.D.Okla.: Def’s high speed chase was PC

DE: Judge issuing track and trace order didn’t have to recuse from trial

The fact “the judge who presided over trial had signed a pen register or ‘track and trace’ warrant before [defendant’s] arrest” didn’t require recusal. The state court had already held issuing a search warrant didn’t require recusal either. Fayton v. … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Neutral and detached magistrate, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on DE: Judge issuing track and trace order didn’t have to recuse from trial

D.Mass.: Late disclosed information provided Franks challenge

How one defendant made a Franks challenge to get a hearing out of late disclosed information. United States v. Gonzalez, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3229 (D. Mass. Jan. 8, 2026)*:

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on D.Mass.: Late disclosed information provided Franks challenge

CA10: A search incident to arrest isn’t valid when there’s no arrest

A search incident to arrest isn’t valid when there’s no arrest. The law is clearly established, so no qualified immunity. Montgomery v. Cruz, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 161 (10th Cir. Jan. 6, 2026). The defense succeeded in a Franks challenge … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Search incident | Comments Off on CA10: A search incident to arrest isn’t valid when there’s no arrest

S.D.N.Y.: Investigative medical exams implicate 4A

“The Fourth Amendment is implicated when medical examinations are undertaken at the initiative of a state official for an investigatory purpose. See Tenenbaum v. Williams, 193 F.3d 581, 606 (2d Cir. 1999) (holding that the Fourth Amendment applies to ‘searches … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion, Search | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: Investigative medical exams implicate 4A

D.N.J.: Someone doesn’t have to be home to execute a SW

It isn’t a proper Fourth Amendment challenge for a warrant not to be executed because no one is home. Rodriguez-Ferreira v. Sweeney, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 560 (D.N.J. Jan. 5, 2026). Defense counsel objected to the search warrant twice on … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Unreasonable application / § 2254(d), Warrant execution | Comments Off on D.N.J.: Someone doesn’t have to be home to execute a SW

UT: Inventory policy needs somehow to be in evidence to challenge scope of search

If you’re challenging whether the officer exceeded an inventory policy, it needs to be in evidence. Here there was only testimony about the written policy, and the court could rely on that. Here, the claim was that inventorying a backpack … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Inventory, Scope of search | Comments Off on UT: Inventory policy needs somehow to be in evidence to challenge scope of search

CA5: ME’s alleged false autopsy didn’t state a Franks claim

A medical examiner’s alleged false autopsy report didn’t state a Franks violation because he wasn’t the affiant in any warrant. Dean v. Phatak, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 33645 (5th Cir. Dec. 23, 2025):

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on CA5: ME’s alleged false autopsy didn’t state a Franks claim

CA9: Taking too long to get SW for phone violated clearly established law

The officer here violated clearly established law by taking too long to apply for a warrant to search plaintiff’s cell phone. Plaintiff promptly sought its return, but that was denied because the officer hadn’t got a warrant yet. Langham v. … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Franks doctrine, Qualified immunity, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA9: Taking too long to get SW for phone violated clearly established law

MN: GFE does not apply to after search changes in law that were obviously coming

“The good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule does not apply to a warrantless vehicle search based solely on the smell of marijuana that occurred before we issued our opinion in State v. Torgerson, 995 N.W.2d 164 (Minn. 2023), which held … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Good faith exception, Nexus, Plain view, feel, smell, Probable cause | Comments Off on MN: GFE does not apply to after search changes in law that were obviously coming

D.Minn.: No duty for officer to resolve traffic stop questions before safety concerns resolved

“All of these questions lasted fewer than thirty seconds–they did not ‘measurably extend’ the stop. Johnson, 555 U.S. at 333. Ali cites no law that suggests that officers must address the traffic infraction before they may ask questions related to … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Nexus, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness | Comments Off on D.Minn.: No duty for officer to resolve traffic stop questions before safety concerns resolved

CA6: Reference to water emoji 💦with dual meaning not a Franks violation

“Swanagan did not make an adequate preliminary showing that Budde’s interpretation of the water emoji was intentionally or recklessly false, so the district court did not clearly err in finding the affidavit truthful. Swanagan asserts that he ‘provided dictionary support … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion, Seizure | Comments Off on CA6: Reference to water emoji 💦with dual meaning not a Franks violation

CA6: Student not entitled to warning before school search

The search of this student was reasonable, and the student had no right to be warned before it was going to happen. Halasz v. Cass City Pub. Sch., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 33093 (6th Cir. Dec. 18, 2025). There was … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Good faith exception, School searches | Comments Off on CA6: Student not entitled to warning before school search

NC: No standing in someone else’s cell phone pinged to find defendant

Defendant used someone else’s cell phone and officers pinged it to find him. He had no standing for the borrowed phone. After arrest, he admitted the shooting in a jail call. “Defendant’s temporary use of the phone does not automatically … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on NC: No standing in someone else’s cell phone pinged to find defendant

WI: “the end of a romantic relationship does not automatically terminate shared authority when the partner continues to access or use the property”

“The fact that Klein expressed anger toward A.V. and moved some of her belongings outside does not establish that her residential status had ended. He did not finish removing her possessions, he permitted her inside, and her household items remained … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on WI: “the end of a romantic relationship does not automatically terminate shared authority when the partner continues to access or use the property”

CA8: Merely handling bag on a Greyhound Bus at a stop wasn’t a search or seizure

The officer’s handling defendant’s suitcase on a Greyhound Bus for five seconds to remove it from the bus, just as the driver or baggage handlers would, before asking him for consent was not unreasonable. Defendant validly consented to its search. … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Franks doctrine, Probable cause, Search, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on CA8: Merely handling bag on a Greyhound Bus at a stop wasn’t a search or seizure

W.D.Ky.: A ruse arrest is legal in CA6

Police using a ruse to arrest defendant is legal in the Sixth Circuit. (Not necessarily in the Ninth, but we’re in the Sixth.) It also doesn’t “shock the conscious [sic, quoting a pleading].” United States v. Carmona, 2025 U.S. Dist. … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on W.D.Ky.: A ruse arrest is legal in CA6

W.D.Wash.: PC was shown for cell phone data for particular number and any number switched to, if provider knows it

Probable cause was shown for phone records for both the number sought and any number the provider knew that the owner had changed to, even without identifying it. And, good faith applied: “Therefore, even if the continuity provision within the … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Franks doctrine, Particularity | Comments Off on W.D.Wash.: PC was shown for cell phone data for particular number and any number switched to, if provider knows it

E.D.Tenn.: Def had standing in sister’s car he bought for her she let him drive

Defendant bought his sister her vehicle and she permitted him to drive it. He had standing to contest the stop. The stop was justified and reasonable in scope. United States v. Tillery, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 235323 (E.D. Tenn. Oct. … Continue reading

Posted in Excessive force, Franks doctrine, Standing | Comments Off on E.D.Tenn.: Def had standing in sister’s car he bought for her she let him drive