D.S.D.: Def’s lies to police during arrest completely undermines his credibility in a pro se Franks challenge

Defendant pro se makes allegations of a Franks violation but nothing substantive is offered for the “substantial preliminary showing.” Moreover, because he lied to the officers during his arrest, the court finds him without credibility. United States v. Ward, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220297 (D.S.D. Nov. 22, 2023),* adopted, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220296 (D.S.D. Dec. 8, 2023).*

The second entry to the home was but “a continuation of the purpose for which officers were granted permission to enter the home by Charidy Craven, and does not constitute a separate entry requiring additional consent, but would be legal even if considered to be a separate entry.” Snell v. State, 2023 Tex. App. LEXIS 9267 (Tex. App. – Houston (1st Dist.) Dec. 12, 2023).*

Plaintiff alleges an “unreasonable search” by strip search but doesn’t cite the Fourth Amendment. It’s enough for now. Parkinson v. Town of Niskayuna, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220335 (N.D.N.Y. Dec. 11, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Burden of pleading, Consent, Franks doctrine, Strip search. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.