Category Archives: Franks doctrine

AK: Omission was maybe reckless but PC on the remainder

The officer’s omission of the CI’s criminal charges from the affidavit for the search warrant was reckless at worst, but the totality of the affidavit showed the CI’s potential motives for providing information. Moreover, there was probable cause even without … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause | Comments Off on AK: Omission was maybe reckless but PC on the remainder

CA10: Parolee’s § 1983 claim he was wrongfully arrested on parole doesn’t state a claim because he’s always “in custody”

Plaintiff’s claim that he was unreasonably arrested for a parole violation before actually getting on parole is rejected because a parolee is still in custody no matter what. “Similarly, there is no authority to support Mr. Neilsen’s argument that an … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on CA10: Parolee’s § 1983 claim he was wrongfully arrested on parole doesn’t state a claim because he’s always “in custody”

Reason: Grand Jury Indictments Paint a Picture of Deadly Deceit in Houston Narcotics Division

Reason: Grand Jury Indictments Paint a Picture of Deadly Deceit in Houston Narcotics Division by Jacob Sullum (“The charges, which grew out of a lethal 2019 raid based on a fraudulent search warrant affidavit, suggest that cops routinely built their … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on Reason: Grand Jury Indictments Paint a Picture of Deadly Deceit in Houston Narcotics Division

MI: Flint water crisis case states claim for due process violation of bodily integrity

The suit over the City of Flint water crisis stated a claim, inter alia, for a due process violation of bodily integrity. Mays v. Snyder, 2020 Mich. LEXIS 1351 (July 29, 2020) (plurality). The A.F. Ct. Crim. App. erred in … Continue reading

Posted in Due process, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on MI: Flint water crisis case states claim for due process violation of bodily integrity

D.Ore.: Illegibility of judge’s signature on SW not 4A violation

Just because the state trial judge’s signature was illegible doesn’t violate the Fourth Amendment. The judge’s name was stamped below. United States v. McElroy, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132608 (D. Ore. July 24, 2020). Franks challenge fails: “Thus, the bottom … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on D.Ore.: Illegibility of judge’s signature on SW not 4A violation

CA6: Def showed no REP in package with a fake name sent to his house

Defendant showed no reasonable expectation of privacy in a package addressed to a fake name at his address. United States v. James, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 22766 (6th Cir. July 21, 2020). Defendant failed to show that the challenged statements … Continue reading

Posted in Anticipatory warrant, Automobile exception, Franks doctrine, Mail and packages | Comments Off on CA6: Def showed no REP in package with a fake name sent to his house

CA8: Mistake of name in SW affidavit deleted by district court wasn’t material

The affidavit for search warrant here originally used the name “Aaren” but the officer found “Taylor” could be the last name, and the affidavit was changed for that. It turned out that there were two people. The district court properly … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Arrest or entry on arrest, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on CA8: Mistake of name in SW affidavit deleted by district court wasn’t material

PA: State waived challenge to def’s reliance on state constitution

The state waived its challenge to the defendant’s reliance on the state constitution by failure to litigate it below. Waiver claims have to be applied evenhandedly between the state and defendants. Commonwealth v. Wolfel, 2020 Pa. LEXIS 3797 (July 21, … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Nexus, State constitution, Waiver | Comments Off on PA: State waived challenge to def’s reliance on state constitution

CA6: Not telling officers during arrest and transport of pre-existing injury gives them QI

“Detroit police arrested Baxter Jones for disorderly conduct. They transported Jones, who uses a wheelchair, in a modified cargo van. Jones says riding in the van aggravated his spinal injuries and hurt his shoulders and hands. The district court denied … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA6: Not telling officers during arrest and transport of pre-existing injury gives them QI

N.D.Ohio: Mere desire to cross-examine about the drug dog’s bona fides isn’t a Franks issue

Merely wanting to cross-examine about the reliability of the drug dog isn’t a Franks challenge. There still has to be a “substantial preliminary showing” of a falsity, and desire to cross-examine isn’t it. United States v. Robinson, 2020 U.S. Dist. … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause | Comments Off on N.D.Ohio: Mere desire to cross-examine about the drug dog’s bona fides isn’t a Franks issue

D.Minn.: Motion to suppress denied for lack of specificity

Defendant’s motion to suppress is denied for lack of specificity. United States v. Zuniga-Garcia, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122220 (D. Minn. June 24, 2020). There was probable cause for the search warrant, despite the claimed Franks violation which was not … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Motion to suppress | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Motion to suppress denied for lack of specificity

CA3 still doesn’t adopt standard of review for Franks challenges

The Third Circuit notes that it has yet to adopt a standard of review for Franks claims; see United States v. Pavulak, 700 F.3d 651, 665-66 (3d Cir. 2012); and it doesn’t have to here because, whichever applies, defendant loses. … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion, Standards of review | Comments Off on CA3 still doesn’t adopt standard of review for Franks challenges

MA: When seizing digital devices under SW, looking at camera pictures didn’t require exclusion where not mentioned in SW for camera

During a search of defendant’s house under a warrant that included seizing digital devices, the officer turned on a camera and scrolled through the pictures. When the warrant was sought for the camera, no mention was made, and inevitable discovery … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Inevitable discovery, Probable cause | Comments Off on MA: When seizing digital devices under SW, looking at camera pictures didn’t require exclusion where not mentioned in SW for camera

D.Minn.: Late night stop, no DL, digital scale on floor is RS

This late night stop was reasonably extended because the driver didn’t have a DL on him and there appeared to be a digital scale on the floor. United States v. Henry, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115939 (D. Minn. May 20, … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Late night stop, no DL, digital scale on floor is RS

D.Del.: Mere denials of the facts doesn’t make a Franks claim

Just saying in a motion to suppress the defendant “‘denies telling law enforcement that additional drugs could be found within his apartment’ and ‘disputes the accuracy’ of the statement that officers detected the odor of burnt marijuana in the apartment” … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on D.Del.: Mere denials of the facts doesn’t make a Franks claim

D.Mont.: Drug dog’s reliability doesn’t need to be shown in SW application

A search warrant application does not have to support the reliability of a drug dog used to establish the probable cause under Harris. The remedy is a motion to suppress. “As this Court reads it, Harris is a reiteration of … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Franks doctrine, Probable cause | Comments Off on D.Mont.: Drug dog’s reliability doesn’t need to be shown in SW application

W.D.N.Y.: Inevitable discovery obviated def’s Franks challenge

A Franks hearing wasn’t required because the court finds that, even if Franks could be satisfied here, the evidence was inevitably found. United States v. Chapline, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104509 (W.D. N.Y. June 12, 2020). It was reasonable to … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Inevitable discovery, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on W.D.N.Y.: Inevitable discovery obviated def’s Franks challenge

D.Ariz.: Whether officer should have believed CI was lying not a Franks issue

Defendant contends that the affiant officer should have known that the CI was lying because of a motive to falsify, but doesn’t say how the officer would have known or did know. That’s insufficient for Franks. Another CI was not … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.Ariz.: Whether officer should have believed CI was lying not a Franks issue

NJ: Destruction by policy of audio of telephonic SW application required suppression even without bad faith

This case proceeded on a telephonic search warrant where the application was recorded as required by law. The recording, however, was destroyed in 90 days under the department’s records retention policy. While the destruction wasn’t in bad faith, the recording … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on NJ: Destruction by policy of audio of telephonic SW application required suppression even without bad faith

Three on Franks

Defendant’s Franks challenge was properly rejected because assuming the challenged information was out of the affidavit, probable cause still exists. United States v. Carrasco, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 17553 (9th Cir. June 4, 2020).* In a civil rights case, the … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine | Comments Off on Three on Franks