Category Archives: Franks doctrine

CA4: SW affidavit not required to name an offender

A search warrant is about whether evidence would be found in the place to be searched, not whether there’s an offender. United States v. Johnson, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 10138 (4th Cir. Apr. 28, 2025). 2255 petitioner’s Franks ineffective assistance … Continue reading

Posted in Cell site location information, Curtilage, Dog sniff, Franks doctrine, Warrant papers | Comments Off on CA4: SW affidavit not required to name an offender

CA9: Electronic monitoring condition of pretrial release was essentially a contract between def and court, thus consent

The Superior Court of San Francisco imposes electronic monitoring as a condition of pretrial release. Because it’s essentially a contract between the defendant and court, it’s consent to EM for release. It also does not violate state separation of powers. … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Franks doctrine, GPS / Tracking Data, Inventory, Private search, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on CA9: Electronic monitoring condition of pretrial release was essentially a contract between def and court, thus consent

W.D.La.: Product of uncharged search of house comes in under 404(b)

Defendant was indicted for possession of drugs in a storage unit, but drugs and cash were also found in his house. That can come in under 404(b). United States v. Harris, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75696 (W.D. La. Apr. 21, … Continue reading

Posted in Administrative search, Admissibility of evidence, Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on W.D.La.: Product of uncharged search of house comes in under 404(b)

W.D.Pa.: Def doesn’t overcome common law presumption SW records are public records

Defendant objects to the search warrant materials being unsealed on the docket. He has not overcome the common law presumption of open access. The First Amendment right of public access is even broader. These papers are unsealed. United States v. … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Strip search, Warrant papers | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: Def doesn’t overcome common law presumption SW records are public records

S.D.N.Y.: SW affidavit differs from crime in indictment such that court grants Franks hearing

Because the affidavit for search warrant differs so much from the ultimate crime defendants were charged with, defendant at least gets a Franks hearing. There’s some suggestion of materiality, but that’s not decided yet. United States v. Peraire-Bueno, 2025 U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Standing | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: SW affidavit differs from crime in indictment such that court grants Franks hearing

CA6: Ptf’s § 1983 case over his traffic stop and tickets barred by Younger

Plaintiff was ticketed by officers of the Kirkland PD, one for having a fictitious license plate, and he sued in federal court claiming Fourth Amendment and right to travel violations and the city had no jurisdiction over him. Younger bars … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Mail and packages, Standing | Comments Off on CA6: Ptf’s § 1983 case over his traffic stop and tickets barred by Younger

CA1: Because it’s still a federal crime, state decrim of MJ didn’t defeat PC

While Rhode Island had decriminalized small amounts of marijuana, the fact it’s still a federal crime permitted officers to prolong the stop. United States v. Pavao, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 9156 (1st Cir. Apr. 17, 2025). 2255 petitioner’s Franks claim … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause | Comments Off on CA1: Because it’s still a federal crime, state decrim of MJ didn’t defeat PC

E.D.Wis.: Affidavit’s statement def was in surveillance video was reasonable and not reckless

Officer’s statement that defendant was in a surveillance video was a reasonable conclusion, and not a reckless overstatement for Franks. United States v. Warren, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70293 (E.D. Wis. Apr. 14, 2025).* Defendant passed up a conditional plea … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on E.D.Wis.: Affidavit’s statement def was in surveillance video was reasonable and not reckless

D.Alaska: Recklessly omitted text messages were material to PC finding; suppression granted

Omitted text messages were material to the probable cause finding, and the officer was at least reckless in not including them. Franks satisfied: “Therefore, the Court agrees with Judge Scoble’s reasoning, adopts his analysis, and finds that, had Detective Ruble … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Standards of review, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on D.Alaska: Recklessly omitted text messages were material to PC finding; suppression granted

D.N.J.: Boxing in def’s car was a seizure

“Law enforcement’s conduct here—boxing in Deas’ Kia, ordering both Defendants out of the car, and placing them in handcuffs—falls within the scope of a seizure.” It was with reasonable suspicion. Then a dog alerted, then they got a warrant. United … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Seizure | Comments Off on D.N.J.: Boxing in def’s car was a seizure

C.D.Cal.: Affidavit’s failure to mention state court suppressed the same search was material and reckless under Franks

The affiant’s failure to include that a state court suppressed the underlying search was material to probable cause in federal court. The state search was based on the probation search exception, but the target was off probation. “This omission created … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Issue preclusion, Probable cause | Comments Off on C.D.Cal.: Affidavit’s failure to mention state court suppressed the same search was material and reckless under Franks

CA3: Def’s being a manager of premises gave RS as to him under PA law

Defendant’s status as the manager of a lounge gave reasonable suspicion to detain him under Pennsylvania law for what was going on inside. United States v. Burgess, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 7359 (3d Cir. Mar. 31, 2025). Plaintiff’s civil Franks … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA3: Def’s being a manager of premises gave RS as to him under PA law

W.D.Va.: No REP in non-legal jail mail from being scanned for tablet viewing

There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in non-legal mail in jail. Here, mail was scanned and made into a pdf for viewing on a tablet. Cecil v. Keller, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56313 (W.D. Va. Mar. 25, 2025).* A … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Mail and packages, Prison and jail searches, Probable cause | Comments Off on W.D.Va.: No REP in non-legal jail mail from being scanned for tablet viewing

E.D.Pa.: Overnight guest had standing in the house but not the backyard

An overnight guest had standing in the house but not the backyard. United States v. Halley, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53342 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 24, 2025). Even if there was a false statement in the affidavit for search warrant, it … Continue reading

Posted in Attenuation, Franks doctrine, Standing, Unreasonable application / § 2254(d) | Comments Off on E.D.Pa.: Overnight guest had standing in the house but not the backyard

CA1: Omission of the CI’s criminal history was only negligent for Franks purposes

The affiant’s omission of the CI’s criminal history was only negligent and didn’t undermine the probable cause showing. United States v. Francis, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6795 (1st Cir. Mar. 24, 2025). Some of evidence here was discovered before any … Continue reading

Posted in Attenuation, Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA1: Omission of the CI’s criminal history was only negligent for Franks purposes

CA9: 71-day delay for iPhone SW was reasonable where software update was involved

71-day delay in getting search warrant to access defendant’s cell phone was reasonable where the delay was attributed to waiting for a software update for their device because the iPhone was a newer model. United States v. Powell, 2025 U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Plain view, feel, smell, Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA9: 71-day delay for iPhone SW was reasonable where software update was involved

PA: PO search of parolee’s visitor required RS which was lacking

Under a parole search of one Scott in his home, the PO had authority to frisk the visitor defendant if he had safety concerns or reasonable suspicion, and here they did not. Commonwealth v. Gibson, 2025 PA Super 65, 2025 … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Franks doctrine, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on PA: PO search of parolee’s visitor required RS which was lacking

CA10: A Franks violation can’t be based on information that had not been discovered yet

The affidavit showed probable cause. And, “Detective Ames did not knowingly or recklessly omit exculpatory information from the affidavit because she was not aware of any such information when she prepared the affidavit.” Weidner v. McHale, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on CA10: A Franks violation can’t be based on information that had not been discovered yet

CA2: 50 days of pole camera surveillance outside a business wasn’t unreasonable search

A pole camera outside defendant’s business for 50 days was not an unreasonable search. United States v. Harry, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5329 (2d Cir. Mar. 7, 2025). Defendant was improperly denied a hearing. The codefendant had a suppression hearing … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Pole cameras, Standing | Comments Off on CA2: 50 days of pole camera surveillance outside a business wasn’t unreasonable search

E.D.Cal.: 27-page SW affidavit was sufficient and didn’t have to include every detail

The affidavit for warrant was 27 pages long and it omitted a lot of detail, but that’s not enough to show a Franks violation. Every detail doesn’t have to be included, and the omissions here don’t undermine the probable cause … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Probable cause | Comments Off on E.D.Cal.: 27-page SW affidavit was sufficient and didn’t have to include every detail