CA6: State issuing magistrate’s failure to transcribe supplemental information for PC was not enough to suppress

The affidavit and supplementing testimony provided substantial probable cause for issuance of the warrant. State law requires any testimony supplementing a search warrant affidavit be preserved and transcribed. The state issuing magistrate failed. The officer, however, acted in good faith, and the magistrate’s failure was not enough to suppress. This was not an abandonment of the magistrate’s role. United States v. Davis, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 28046 (6th Cir. Oct. 23, 2023).

“Officers did not commit an egregious violation of Ramirez Santiago’s Fourth Amendment rights when they stopped his vehicle. United States v. O’Connor, 658 F.2d 688, 691 (9th Cir. 1981) (‘It is obvious that in executing the warrant, the agents could stop the vehicle in which they reasonably thought [the warrant target] was a passenger.’). Nor did they egregiously violate his Fourth Amendment rights during the stop by asking him for identification, United States v. Diaz-Castaneda, 494 F.3d 1146, 1152-53 (9th Cir. 2007), or by asking him about his immigration status, see Muehler v. Mena, 544 U.S. 93, 100-01, 125 S. Ct. 1465, 161 L. Ed. 2d 299 (2005).” Santiago v. Garland, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 27958 (9th Cir. Oct. 18, 2023).*

Plaintiff did not violate the Alabama statute on failing to properly identify himself after this “stop” of a parked car because he wasn’t seen driving. Actually, he was a mechanic fixing it. Qualified immunity improperly granted. Edger v. McCabe, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 27959 (11th Cir. Oct. 20, 2023) (substituted opinion).*

This entry was posted in Good faith exception, Immigration arrests, Neutral and detached magistrate, Qualified immunity, Warrant papers. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.