\u201cApplying these standards, and giving deference to all inferences Officer Nitzky could reasonably have drawn in favor of the credibility of Mr. Ingram’s complaint, the Court concludes that the detention and search of Defendant at the Denny’s on December 14, 2021, was an unjustified violation of Defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights. The vague statement by Mr. Ingram that he believed a group of men \u2018were after him\u2019 is not enough, by itself, to provide a particularized and objective basis for suspecting that Defendant had committed or was about to commit a crime.\u201d United States v. Thomas, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101408 (W.D.Okla. June 7, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The allegedly false information will not be removed from the affidavit. Even if it was, there still is probable cause. United States v. Truett, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101448 (M.D.Tenn. June 6, 2022).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This habeas petitioner\u2019s claim that the search warrants for his property lacked seals and therefore must be forged fails for lack of proof that they were. That was litigated and lost. Also, defense counsel wasn\u2019t ineffective for not raising it where there\u2019s nothing to back it up. Davison v. United States, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 15661 (6th Cir. June 7, 2022).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cApplying these standards, and giving deference to all inferences Officer Nitzky could reasonably have drawn in favor of the credibility of Mr. Ingram’s complaint, the Court concludes that the detention and search of Defendant at the Denny’s on December 14, … Continue reading