Category Archives: Franks doctrine

S.D.Ill.: Extrinsic evidence is admissible in a Franks challenge

Extrinsic evidence of alleged falsity in a Franks challenge is admissible. United States v. Smith, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 234002 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 20, 2022). Questioning defendant about the presence of a firearm in his vehicle fell within the Quarles … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Computer and cloud searches, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on S.D.Ill.: Extrinsic evidence is admissible in a Franks challenge

CA6: Affidavit circumstantially supported nexus

There was nexus to defendant’s home as a base of operations for drug sales based on circumstantial evidence in the affidavit for warrant. United States v. Pointer, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 35506 (6th Cir. Dec. 20, 2022).* The search warrant … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Nexus, Staleness | Comments Off on CA6: Affidavit circumstantially supported nexus

N.D.Ill.: PC for admin. warrant became stale before it was sought

This administrative search warrant under OSHA became stale by the government’s delay in seeking it and litigation delays. Also, USMJs have jurisdiction to issue administrative inspection warrants. F.R.C.P. 72 objections do not apply to administrative warrants because they frustrate enforcement … Continue reading

Posted in Administrative search, Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion, Staleness | Comments Off on N.D.Ill.: PC for admin. warrant became stale before it was sought

WI: When statute or ordinance on which search was based is challenged, AG or city must be present

When challenging the constitutionality of an ordinance or statute as making a search and seizure unreasonable, defendant must join the city or notify the AG to participate. Without it, that’s waiver. “Because Raddemann has not shown compliance with Wis. Stat. … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Waiver | Comments Off on WI: When statute or ordinance on which search was based is challenged, AG or city must be present

N.D.Cal.: Attic apt and treehouse not specified in SW, but searches there still reasonable

An attic apartment and a treehouse were not specifically within the terms of the warrant, but the search was still reasonable. United States v. Ayala, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 227976 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 19, 2022). Defendant didn’t timely challenge his … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion, Scope of search, Waiver | Comments Off on N.D.Cal.: Attic apt and treehouse not specified in SW, but searches there still reasonable

CA8: SW in CP case can include whole house, not just def’s room

In a child pornography case, the search warrant need not be limited to only defendant’s room. It can be the whole house. United States v. Schave, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 34757 (8th Cir. Dec. 16, 2022). Officers got a warrant … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Particularity, Scope of search | Comments Off on CA8: SW in CP case can include whole house, not just def’s room

Cal.2: MJ smell associated with minors still RS for an offense

Officers ran an LPN and saw that the vehicle had expired tags. Driving next to the car, officers smelled burnt marijuana and knew that the users were minors which is still an offense under California law. That was cause for … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Inevitable discovery, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on Cal.2: MJ smell associated with minors still RS for an offense

TX14: PC for a cell phone requires more than a bare conclusion one was present or involved; no PC here

“A probable cause affidavit supporting a cell phone search must contain evidence of the requisite nexus with more than mere conclusory allegations. For example, the Court of Criminal Appeals recently held that generic, boilerplate language about cell phone use among … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Franks doctrine, Probable cause, Staleness | Comments Off on TX14: PC for a cell phone requires more than a bare conclusion one was present or involved; no PC here

OR: Holding def’s ID for 30 minutes for no apparent reason was a seizure without RS

Retaining defendant’s ID for 30 minutes before even thinking about questioning his identity was a seizure without reasonable suspicion. State v. Orman, 322 Or. App. 707, 2022 Ore. App. LEXIS 1479 (Nov. 16, 2022). Defendant was not seized when he … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Inevitable discovery, Seizure | Comments Off on OR: Holding def’s ID for 30 minutes for no apparent reason was a seizure without RS

N.D.Ind.: Franks hearing ordered over officer’s claim of smell of MJ

Defendant gets a Franks hearing even if to rebut the government’s claim the good faith exception applies. The affiant officer claimed there was an “overwhelming” smell of marijuana coming from defendant’s house as they approached for a knock-and-talk, which was … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Franks doctrine, Good faith exception, Issue preclusion, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on N.D.Ind.: Franks hearing ordered over officer’s claim of smell of MJ

WV: Juvenile “pick-up” order issued on PC was equivalent of warrant for Payton purposes for entry into mom’s home

Entry on a juvenile “pick-up” order here “was founded upon probable cause to believe that her ‘health, safety and welfare’ demanded it …. was the functional equivalent of an arrest warrant and was lawfully issued.” Therefore, the entry was valid … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Arrest or entry on arrest, Franks doctrine, Scope of search | Comments Off on WV: Juvenile “pick-up” order issued on PC was equivalent of warrant for Payton purposes for entry into mom’s home

D.Vt.: Def’s misidentification in original affidavit was later corrected and overall survives Franks challenge

There were omissions in the original affidavit for warrant about identification that were later cleared up in a subsequent affidavit for another. On the whole, probable cause remains no matter what. United States v. Mohamud, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 205560 … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on D.Vt.: Def’s misidentification in original affidavit was later corrected and overall survives Franks challenge

CA4: Omissions under Franks have to be shown “designed to mislead”

When challenging a search warrant under Franks for omission of information, the defendant’s burden is higher because affidavits for warrants never include all available information and don’t have to, and the omissions have to be shown “designed to mislead.” Defendant … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on CA4: Omissions under Franks have to be shown “designed to mislead”

FL2: Def counsel not ineffective where search evidence not objected to had no apparent prejudice to case

Defense counsel was ineffective in not moving to suppress one piece of evidence, but defendant can’t show he was prejudiced by it on the case as a whole. Szewczyk v. State, 2022 Fla. App. LEXIS 7180 (Fla. 2d DCA Oct. … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on FL2: Def counsel not ineffective where search evidence not objected to had no apparent prejudice to case

M.D.Fla.: Alleged nice “threat” to break down door to enter on warrant was not coercive

Officer’s alleged threat to break down the door stated in a nice tone of voice was not coercive, even if true, because the officer could have. On the totality, there was consent to enter to execute the arrest warrant because … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Consent, Franks doctrine, Particularity | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: Alleged nice “threat” to break down door to enter on warrant was not coercive

Techdirt: Federal Judge Says FBI Misled Magistrate When Seeking Safe Deposit Warrants, OKs Searches Anyway

Techdirt: Federal Judge Says FBI Misled Magistrate When Seeking Safe Deposit Warrants, OKs Searches Anyway by Tim Cushing (“Unfortunately, the federal court handling this case doesn’t think the FBI’s lie matters, at least not in terms of determining probable cause. … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Good faith exception | Comments Off on Techdirt: Federal Judge Says FBI Misled Magistrate When Seeking Safe Deposit Warrants, OKs Searches Anyway

N.D.Cal.: Running passengers’ IDs was outside mission of traffic stop

Running the IDs of the passengers and checking on the probation or parole status was beyond the mission of the traffic stop. Motion to suppress granted. United States v. Taylor, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182023 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 4, 2022). … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion, Staleness | Comments Off on N.D.Cal.: Running passengers’ IDs was outside mission of traffic stop

NY2: Franks claim has to be fully developed; it’s more than just a false statement

Franks claim fails for failure to show how the alleged false statements undermined the probable cause. “The defendant failed to meet his burden of controverting the warrant, as he failed to analyze, must less establish, that after the excise of … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion, Search incident | Comments Off on NY2: Franks claim has to be fully developed; it’s more than just a false statement

M.D.Tenn.: Failure to mention in a warrant application that CI was getting leniency is not a Franks violation

Failure to mention in a warrant application that the CI was getting leniency is not a Franks violation. (It’s practically common knowledge they probably are.) Robinson v. United States, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174791 (M.D. Tenn. Sep. 27, 2022):

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on M.D.Tenn.: Failure to mention in a warrant application that CI was getting leniency is not a Franks violation

NV: Protective sweep doesn’t require a prior arrest and state didn’t articulate the RS of potential danger for it

“While we hold that a protective sweep does not require a prior arrest, we conclude that the district court correctly concluded that the search performed here was not a lawful protective sweep because it was not based on articulable facts … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Protective sweep, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on NV: Protective sweep doesn’t require a prior arrest and state didn’t articulate the RS of potential danger for it