\u201cThe Eleventh Circuit has made clear that a party must \u2018pinpoint those portions of the magistrate’s report that the district court must specially consider.\u2019 Schultz, 565 F.3d at 1361. Defendant has not done so here. In sum, Defendant’s one-sentence statement that the search warrant was too broad and the one-sentence statement that the warrant was not supported by probable cause, without any further reference to the R&R, is insufficient to trigger de novo review.\u201d United States v. Benitez, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48141 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 21, 2023).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cAccordingly, Defendant has not made, nor can he make based on his proffered evidence, a preliminary showing, much less a \u2018substantial preliminary showing,\u2019 that the affidavit that supported the search warrant in this case contained any false or misleading statement. As recognized by the Fourth Circuit, Defendant’s burden before a Franks hearing can take place is a heavy one, and Defendant has failed to meet that burden here.\u201d United States v. Newbold, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48145 (M.D.N.C. Mar. 21, 2023).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The omitted information does not vitiate the probable cause in the affidavit under Franks. United States v. Kiejzo, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48307 (D. Mass. Mar. 21, 2023).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cThe Eleventh Circuit has made clear that a party must \u2018pinpoint those portions of the magistrate’s report that the district court must specially consider.\u2019 Schultz, 565 F.3d at 1361. Defendant has not done so here. In sum, Defendant’s one-sentence statement … Continue reading