Category Archives: Franks doctrine

TN: Owner of cell phone doesn’t need to be known for SW for it

Search warrants are directed at things and information, and the fact officers didn’t know the owner of the cell phone didn’t mean the warrant was invalid. The phone revealed internet searches about a homicide before it was public knowledge. State … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause, Scope of search | Comments Off on TN: Owner of cell phone doesn’t need to be known for SW for it

E.D.N.Y.: Def gets Franks but govt also gets to show justification for protective sweep

There were mistakes in the affidavit that at least gets defendant a Franks hearing. The government, however, will get to provide more information about the justification for a protective sweep which is not confined to the four corners. United States … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Protective sweep | Comments Off on E.D.N.Y.: Def gets Franks but govt also gets to show justification for protective sweep

CA10: 68 days of pole camera surveillance in disability fraud case was reasonable

Suspecting VA benefits fraud, the VA OIG surveilled defendant for months and then installed a remote controlled and motion activated pole camera on top of a school across the street. They had 15 hours of video for 68 days, and … Continue reading

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Franks doctrine, Pole cameras, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA10: 68 days of pole camera surveillance in disability fraud case was reasonable

D.N.M.: No GFE for a Franks violation

Defendant met his Franks burden and showed a false statement in the affidavit for search warrant that was material to the probable cause finding. The statement was from the chief to the affiant. Finally, there is no good faith exception … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Good faith exception, Probable cause | Comments Off on D.N.M.: No GFE for a Franks violation

OH3: Parole search authority is statutory, not coerced consent

The parole search statute governs parole searches. It is not a matter of coerced consent. State v. Harrison, 2024-Ohio-884, 2024 Ohio App. LEXIS 816 (3d Dist. Mar. 11, 2024). Civil Franks violation: “The omission of the full timeline is material … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on OH3: Parole search authority is statutory, not coerced consent

MA: “Any persons present” clause in SW permitted search of one who left before search but hung around

“We conclude that a search warrant authorizing a search of ‘any person present’ allows a search of any person present in the property to be searched during the execution of the search warrant, including persons present during the execution but … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Scope of search | Comments Off on MA: “Any persons present” clause in SW permitted search of one who left before search but hung around

N.D.Ala.: By the time the drug dog entered the car, there already was PC

The drug dog entered the car on the second attempt. But defendant left the door open, and the smell of marijuana was evident. The officer held the dog back in case there was something hazardous in the car. Still, not … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Franks doctrine, Good faith exception, Trespass | Comments Off on N.D.Ala.: By the time the drug dog entered the car, there already was PC

E.D.Pa.: In a cell phone search, cached data was within the “electronic data or memory features” of the phone as provided by the SW

Cached data on defendant’s cell phone is included in “[a]ll documents, including in electronic form, and stored communications including … photographs, videos, and any other electronic data or other memory features contained in the devices and SIM cards[.]” The search … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Franks doctrine, Qualified immunity, Scope of search, Standing | Comments Off on E.D.Pa.: In a cell phone search, cached data was within the “electronic data or memory features” of the phone as provided by the SW

NJ: Prior knowledge def probably had drugs in car didn’t require SW, and automobile exception still applied

Prior knowledge defendant might have marijuana in his car didn’t require the police to get a search warrant for the car. The automobile exception still applied. [Eight months afterward, NJ legalized marijuana.] State v. Baker, 2024 N.J. Super. LEXIS 24 … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on NJ: Prior knowledge def probably had drugs in car didn’t require SW, and automobile exception still applied

CA10: Evidence obtained by state in prosecution later barred by McGirt still with good faith

Defendant was originally prosecuted in Oklahoma state court for murder. After McGirt v. Oklahoma, he moved to set aside the Oklahoma conviction as being obtained without jurisdiction. In federal court, he moved to suppress the evidence obtained by the state … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Good faith exception, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on CA10: Evidence obtained by state in prosecution later barred by McGirt still with good faith

D.Kan.: Cross-designated state-federal officer was “federal officer” for assault charge during execution of SW

Assaulting a state officer cross-designated as a federal officer qualified for assaulting a federal officer during execution of a search warrant. United States v. Butler, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36172 (D. Kan. Mar. 1, 2024). The state courts did not … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion, Unreasonable application / § 2254(d), Warrant execution | Comments Off on D.Kan.: Cross-designated state-federal officer was “federal officer” for assault charge during execution of SW

CA11: CoA granted on 2255 4A claim based on alleged prosecutorial misconduct

2255 appellant gets a certificate of appealability for the district court’s possible misapprehension of the Fourth Amendment issue he raised which included a prosecutorial misconduct claim. Jones v. United States, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 4629 (11th Cir. Feb. 27, 2024):

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on CA11: CoA granted on 2255 4A claim based on alleged prosecutorial misconduct

C.D.Cal.: Franks challenge succeeds in FIPF case

The search warrant for felon in possession was based on the officer affiant’s assertion defendant was a convicted felon but it was based on evaluation of paperwork from Georgia that showed he was a first offender without judgment of guilt … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on C.D.Cal.: Franks challenge succeeds in FIPF case

OH2: Allegation that search occurred before SW issued is not a Franks issue

“A second problem is that the foregoing scenario does not raise a Franks issue. If Detective Saunders did prematurely enter the house without a warrant, he may have violated the Fourth Amendment. But that act would not establish any falseness … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Protective sweep | Comments Off on OH2: Allegation that search occurred before SW issued is not a Franks issue

WV: Police looking at the exterior of defendant’s car was not a search and violated no REP

Police looking at the exterior of defendant’s car was not a search and violated no reasonable expectation of privacy. State v. Estep, 2024 W. Va. LEXIS 92 (Feb. 20, 2024).* The trial court granted a Franks motion, but the state … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Search | Comments Off on WV: Police looking at the exterior of defendant’s car was not a search and violated no REP

KY: Misstatements of law not subject to Franks challenge

A misstatement of law is not subject to a Franks challenge. Search warrant affidavits are usually drafted in a hurry by nonlawyers, and it’s up to the issuing magistrate to decide whether there is a substantial basis for believing a … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Private search, Reasonableness | Comments Off on KY: Misstatements of law not subject to Franks challenge

DE: Def can’t show vindictive prosecution to get names of those who allegedly provided false information to police for SW of public records

In a case involving a public official accused of misappropriating funds, there was a search warrant for office records. She claimed she was entitled to the names of those who might have provided false information to investigators for the warrant … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on DE: Def can’t show vindictive prosecution to get names of those who allegedly provided false information to police for SW of public records

FL2: Suppression under Franks reversed; not material to PC

Defendant established that there were false statements in the affidavit for warrant that ran the full spectrum from negligence to likely intentionality. But probable cause remained, even excluding what was challenged. “While the temptation to advance the prophylactic purpose of … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Nexus, Probable cause | Comments Off on FL2: Suppression under Franks reversed; not material to PC

E.D.Cal.: Affidavit for SW for def being a prohibited person for firearms possession doesn’t have to allege interstate commerce nexus

A warrant was issued for defendant’s home in California for proof of travel to the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol. Officers found firearms and defendant was a prohibited person because of domestic violence orders. On the firearms warrant, it … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Probable cause | Comments Off on E.D.Cal.: Affidavit for SW for def being a prohibited person for firearms possession doesn’t have to allege interstate commerce nexus

CA8: Failure to mention CI’s convictions or payments for information wasn’t material

The warrant affiant’s failure to mention the CI was paid or had convictions wasn’t material to change the outcome of the probable cause determination. With CIs, things like that can be assumed. United States v. Riaski, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause, Staleness, Standing, Voluntariness | Comments Off on CA8: Failure to mention CI’s convictions or payments for information wasn’t material