CA1: GFE applies to alleged staleness of SW

Defendant operated a pill-making operation in his house for years without detection. He moved to a new place without suspicion for it. The warrant for the prior house was not sufficiently stale to still be valid under the good faith exception. It was a reasonable conclusion, for good faith purposes, that the operation would still be at the old house. The probable cause question was close and doesn’t have to be decided. United States v. Gonzalez, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 21524 (1st Cir. Aug. 26, 2024).

The Delaware AG is investigating theft of ammunition from respondent’s sporting goods store. AG subpoenas can only be to investigate for the “public peace, safety and justice.” This subpoena duces tecum doesn’t impinge on Fourth Amendment rights, and it was reasonable in time, scope, and subject matter. State ex rel. Jennings v. Cabela’s Inc., 2024 Del. Super. LEXIS 603 (Aug. 9, 2024).*

Costs of victims and third parties dealing with search warrants and subpoenas are not a “loss” for sentencing. “USSG § 2B1.1, Application Note 3(D)(ii) (excluding from loss ‘costs incurred by victims primarily to aid the government in the prosecution and criminal investigation of an offense’).” United States v. Pauley, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152282 n.84 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 26, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Good faith exception, Staleness, Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.