{"id":64105,"date":"2026-05-19T14:38:31","date_gmt":"2026-05-19T19:38:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=64105"},"modified":"2026-05-19T14:38:31","modified_gmt":"2026-05-19T19:38:31","slug":"tx14-affidavit-for-sw-gets-deferential-standard-of-review-by-both-the-trial-court-and-appellate-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=64105","title":{"rendered":"TX14: Affidavit for SW gets deferential standard of review by both the trial court and appellate court"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The affidavit for search warrant gets a deferential standard of review by both the trial court and appellate court. Gaither v. State<\/a>, 2026 Tex. App. LEXIS 4588 (Tex. App. \u2013 Houston (14th Dist.) May 19, 2026).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe federal district court judge correctly concluded that the state judge issuing the warrant had probable cause. The application for that warrant established an adequate nexus between Deschambault’s suspected drug trafficking and the iPhone. Our conclusion turns on the fact that Deschambault’s drug trafficking was intimately related to his use of the iPhone: \u2026\u201d Drug deals were arranged on it, and it rang while he was being arrested in a car going to a drug deal. United States v. Deschambault, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 14151 (1st Cir. May 18, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Defense counsel\u2019s failure to question missing pole camera surveillance that was used in the search warrant application wasn\u2019t ineffective assistance of counsel. United States v. Barksdale, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109754 (E.D. Pa. May 18, 2026).* [As in: How would it be helpful?]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The affidavit for search warrant gets a deferential standard of review by both the trial court and appellate court. Gaither v. State, 2026 Tex. App. LEXIS 4588 (Tex. App. \u2013 Houston (14th Dist.) May 19, 2026). \u201cThe federal district court … Continue reading →<\/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":[11,23,38,92,20,96],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-64105","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-good-faith-exception","category-ineffective-assistance","category-nexus","category-pole-cameras","category-probable-cause","category-standards-of-review"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64105","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=64105"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64105\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":64106,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64105\/revisions\/64106"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=64105"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=64105"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=64105"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}