Defendant failed to show standing in packages searched coming to an address he claimed as his “primary address,” but the addressee and sender were not him. United States v. Williams, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26755 (M.D. Ga. Feb. 16, 2023).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2255 petitioner\u2019s search claim was time barred. He sent a records request for the search warrant materials to the wrong place, and the SOL ran. United States v. Cunningham, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26730 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 16, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Franks challenge overruled. \u201cI do not read Glover as creating a bright-line rule that in cases where a search warrant affidavit omits all information about a source’s credibility, that the omissions are presumed material and the affidavit is deficient as a matter of law, as Spencer contends. (Docket # 69 at 9.) As an initial matter, Glover addressed the credibility of \u2018informants,\u2019 not the credibility of sources as a whole. See 755 F.3d at 816. This distinction is important because the Seventh Circuit places significance on the status of the individual providing the information to law enforcement in determining reliability.\u201d United States v. Spencer, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26279 (E.D. Wis. Feb. 16, 2023).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant failed to show standing in packages searched coming to an address he claimed as his “primary address,” but the addressee and sender were not him. United States v. Williams, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26755 (M.D. Ga. Feb. 16, 2023). … Continue reading