\u201cBoth the issuing judge and the reviewing court should take a totality of the circumstances approach in their review of the affidavit, rather than scrutinize the affidavit line-by-line.\u201d A generalized allegation of \u201cerrors\u201d is insufficient to get a Franks hearing. United States v. Carter, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159406 (W.D. Ky. Sept. 19, 2019)*:
\n<\/p>\n
United States v. Greene, 250 F.3d 471, 479 (6th Cir. 2001 (citations omitted). “[C]ourts may afford ‘considerable weight to the conclusion of experienced law enforcement officers regarding where evidence of a crime is likely to be found and [the courts are] entitled to draw reasonable inferences about where evidence is likely to be kept, based on the nature of the crime and the type of offense.” United States v. Allen, 211 F.3d 970, 973 (6th Cir.2000) (quoting United States v. Caicedo, 85 F.3d 1184, 1192 (6th Cir. 1996) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted)).<\/p>\n
“The affidavit is judged on the adequacy of what it does contain, not on what it lacks, or on what a critic might say should have been added.” United States v. Allen, 211 F.3d 970, 975 (6th Cir. 2000). “In reviewing a state magistrate’s determination of probable cause, this court pays ‘great deference’ to a magistrate’s findings, which ‘should not be set aside unless arbitrarily exercised.'” United States v. Leake, 998 F.2d 1359, 1363 (6th Cir. 1993) (citation omitted).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cBoth the issuing judge and the reviewing court should take a totality of the circumstances approach in their review of the affidavit, rather than scrutinize the affidavit line-by-line.\u201d A generalized allegation of \u201cerrors\u201d is insufficient to get a Franks hearing. … Continue reading