A mere technical error in an arrest warrant does not void the warrant. United States v. Cox, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119737 (D. N.J. October 17, 2011):<\/p>\n
Under Third Circuit law, a \u201cmere technical error does not automatically invalidate the warrant.\u201d United States v. Carter, 756 F.2d 310 (3d Cir. 1985)(holding that inaccuracy in the date of the offense in a criminal complaint is not a material or critical variance). The key inquiry is \u201cwhether there has been such a variance as to \u2018affect the substantial rights\u2019 of the accused.\u201d Id. at 313, quoting Cromer v. United States, 142 F.2d 697, 78 U.S. App. D.C. 400 (D.C. Cir. 1944). Such affects would occur if: 1) the accused is not informed as to the charges against him so as to enable him to present his defense and not be taken by surprise by the evidence offered at trial; and 2) the accused is not protected against another prosecution for the same offense. Cromer, 142 F.2d at 698. When a defendant alleges warrant invalidity, he must prove that \u201cthe misstatement was made intentionally or with reckless disregard for the truth.\u201d Carter, 756 F.2d at 313; see Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 98 S. Ct. 2674, 57 L. Ed. 2d 667 (1978).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The \u201cthe unrelated questioning\u201d process which led to consent to search the defendant\u2019s vehicle during a legal traffic stop was valid. United States v. Sandreth, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119510 (D. W.Va. October 17, 2011), R&R 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119505 (N.D. W. Va. September 21, 2011).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading