{"id":47661,"date":"2021-03-12T12:02:14","date_gmt":"2021-03-12T17:02:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=47661"},"modified":"2021-03-12T12:05:32","modified_gmt":"2021-03-12T17:05:32","slug":"e-d-pa-just-because-defense-counsel-finds-an-omitted-fact-interesting-doesnt-make-it-material-not-all-facts-need-be-included","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=47661","title":{"rendered":"E.D.Pa.: Just because defense counsel finds an omitted fact interesting doesn&#8217;t make it &#8220;material&#8221;; not all facts need  be included"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>The 121 page affidavit for search warrant for evidence of drug trafficking was neither stale nor lacked nexus. Defendant\u2019s Franks challenge also fails for lack of a substantial preliminary showing. United States v. Briggs, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44653 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 10, 2021):<\/p>\n\n\n\n<!--more-->\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\"><p>The Franks standard does not require affiants to recite the entire history of events, convey every possible detail, or entertain every conceivable alternative explanation before applying for a search warrant. See Russo, 212 F.3d at 787 (&#8220;Merely because a fact would be of interest to a defense lawyer at trial does not render its omission subject to Franks.&#8221;). The reality is that &#8220;in many cases\u2026it is desirable for officers to provide the magistrate with a distilled version of the circumstances giving rise to probable cause.&#8221; Dempsey v. Bucknell University, 834 F.3d 457, 471 n.10 (3d Cir. 2016). Even if investigators had submitted the common-area security video along with the affidavit, it would have only further corroborated their account.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The 121 page affidavit for search warrant for evidence of drug trafficking was neither stale nor lacked nexus. Defendant\u2019s Franks challenge also fails for lack of a substantial preliminary showing. United States v. Briggs, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44653 (E.D. &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=47661\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-47661","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-franks-doctrine"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47661","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=47661"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47661\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":47664,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/47661\/revisions\/47664"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=47661"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=47661"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=47661"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}