Defendant’s motion to suppress must show a fact dispute to get a hearing, including on application of the good faith exception. United States v. Bailey, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138557 (N.D.Okla. July 26, 2021):
The Court first notes that “[a] hearing will not be held on a defendant’s pre-trial motion to suppress merely because a defendant wants one.” United States v. Harris, 914 F.2d 927, 933 (7th Cir. 1990). A court will conduct a hearing where a defendant demonstrates that a “significant, disputed factual issue” exists. United States v. Sophie, 900 F.2d 1064 (7th Cir.1990). Such a “significant, disputed factual issue” must be alleged “with sufficient definiteness, clarity, and specificity” in the motion. United States v. Howell, 231 F.3d 615, 620 (9th Cir. 2000).
Defendant alleges no facts that indicate the detective was acting in bad-faith when executing the search warrant. Further, defendant raises no other contested factual issues that would implicate the good-faith execution of the warrant. As such, the Court concludes that no contested issues of fact exist that require an evidentiary hearing. The Court will therefore decide the motion on the moving and responsive papers.