At worst, the officer\u2019s omission of three things from the affidavit for search warrant was negligent, not reckless, and, even if the material was included, it doesn\u2019t defeat the finding of probable cause. \u201cThus, because Mr. Simpson has failed to allege, much less make a substantial preliminary showing, that the agent deliberately omitted information from the affidavit in reckless disregard for the truth, nor has he demonstrated that with the omitted information would defeat probable cause, his request for a Franks hearing is denied.\u201d United States v. Simpson, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61558 (E.D. N.C. May 1, 2014).<\/p>\n
Defendant consented to the search of his cell phone. He brought up the subject of the cell phone first. United States v. Stokes, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60760 (E.D. Mo. April 11, 2014).*<\/p>\n
The magistrate\u2019s findings that the search of defendant\u2019s email was reasonable is not objected to, so it is adopted. United States v. Russ, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61677 (E.D. Tex. May 5, 2014).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
At worst, the officer\u2019s omission of three things from the affidavit for search warrant was negligent, not reckless, and, even if the material was included, it doesn\u2019t defeat the finding of probable cause. \u201cThus, because Mr. Simpson has failed to … Continue reading