Not being candid about the SW or affidavit in the motion to suppress isn’t good for the defense

“Moreover, even if Defendant is correct that SAPD lacked probable cause to search his vehicle, a motion to suppress is unlikely to succeed. Defendant focuses on one paragraph of the search warrant affidavits and ignores the other four paragraphs detailing additional bases for probable cause to search Defendant’s residence and storage unit. (Res. Warrant [#65-1], at 1-2, Storage Warrant [65-2], at 1-2.) Furthermore, even if probable cause was lacking, the evidence discovered as a result of the execution of those warrants would still likely be admissible under the good-faith exception.” United States v. Vann, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49279 (W.D.Tex. Mar. 18, 2022).

The search warrant was particular. “Defendant claims the warrant sought much more information than it actually does because he cherry picks certain phrases from the warrant and ignores the limiting principles contained therein.” United States v. Rosario, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49045 (M.D.Pa. Mar. 18, 2022).*

This entry was posted in Burden of pleading. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.