CA1: On a Franks claim based on omissions, add them in and retest for PC

With a Franks claim based on omissions, the court can consider the omissions and, if probable cause remains, the motion to suppress is denied. United States v. Leonard, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 32740 (1st Cir. Nov. 3, 2021).

“Here, viewing the facts in their totality, the Court finds it reasonable that Trooper Tilford suspected illegal activity. Trooper Tilford testified that Defendant admitted that he had been speeding. … Trooper Tilford questioned Defendant, Defendant exhibited excessive nervousness, engaged in “clunky” conversation, stared at the windshield and required long pauses in his sentences. … Defendant behaved in a manner that led Trooper Tilford to believe that Defendant might flee. … Defendant made inconsistent statements regarding his travel plans, as Defendant even later admitted. … Trooper Tilford also observed gas cans in the vehicle, which drug traffickers often will utilize to avoid extra stops. … Indeed, during the hearing, Defendant testified that he actually was under the influence of cocaine at the time of the stop. … Based on Defendant’s extreme nervousness, inconsistent travel itinerary and general demeanor, Trooper Tilford suspected possible criminal activity.” United States v. Smart, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 211981 (E.D.Va. Nov. 3, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.