Air Force: Court martial access to government-owned records is not a 4A issue

Court martial access to government-owned records is not a Fourth Amendment issue. In re AG, 2024 CCA LEXIS 256 (A.F. Ct. Crim. App. June 28, 2024).

“Based on the foregoing, Craine was not entitled to a Franks hearing because he did not provide an offer of proof that he was not present at 791 S. 17th Street at the time of the confidential informant’s alleged purchase of heroin from him on March 1, 2018. His initial motion made such an allegation, but that allegation was unsupported by the ‘affidavits or otherwise reliable statements’ required by Roberts. And his motion to reconsider, which did include such affidavits, did not directly contradict the confidential informant’s claim of purchase—as held by the trial court, ….” State v. Craine, 2024-Ohio-2501 (10th Dist. June 28, 2024).*

“But even if one grants Mr. Bennett’s points [of false statements in the affidavit] for the sake of argument, there is no evidence that Officer Martin deliberately lied or even acted in reckless disregard of the truth. Finally, the misstatements are not material.” United States v. Bennett, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114137 (D. Minn. June 28, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Franks doctrine, Third Party Doctrine. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.