D.N.J.: Technical error in an arrest warrrant doesn’t make it void

A mere technical error in an arrest warrant does not void the warrant. United States v. Cox, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119737 (D. N.J. October 17, 2011):

Under Third Circuit law, a “mere technical error does not automatically invalidate the warrant.” United States v. Carter, 756 F.2d 310 (3d Cir. 1985)(holding that inaccuracy in the date of the offense in a criminal complaint is not a material or critical variance). The key inquiry is “whether there has been such a variance as to ‘affect the substantial rights’ of the accused.” Id. at 313, quoting Cromer v. United States, 142 F.2d 697, 78 U.S. App. D.C. 400 (D.C. Cir. 1944). Such affects would occur if: 1) the accused is not informed as to the charges against him so as to enable him to present his defense and not be taken by surprise by the evidence offered at trial; and 2) the accused is not protected against another prosecution for the same offense. Cromer, 142 F.2d at 698. When a defendant alleges warrant invalidity, he must prove that “the misstatement was made intentionally or with reckless disregard for the truth.” Carter, 756 F.2d at 313; see Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 98 S. Ct. 2674, 57 L. Ed. 2d 667 (1978).

The “the unrelated questioning” process which led to consent to search the defendant’s vehicle during a legal traffic stop was valid. United States v. Sandreth, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119510 (D. W.Va. October 17, 2011), R&R 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119505 (N.D. W. Va. September 21, 2011).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.