Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Fourth Amendment

Criminal Law

: Fourth Amendment

N.D. Cal.: A nitpicking Franks challenge failed

By John Wesley Hall, Jr.

Defendant failed in a nitpicking Franks challenge. The affiant is not required to make every conceivable explanation of the facts and circumstances. Informant's alleged false statement to the police was not subject to Franks, even if the defense could prove it. United States v. Lyles, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23382 (N.D. Cal. March 11, 2009)*: Lyles points to several statements or omissions that he claims entitle him to a Franks hearing. Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 171-72 (1978). First, he contends that prior to concluding that there was "excessive electrical usage" at his residence, the affiant should have specified that his house runs solely on electrical power. However, because the affiant was not required to list every possible explanation in the affidavit regarding the excessive electrical usage, this argument fails...continue to full post

Full post as published by Fourth Amendment on March 29, 2009 (boomark / email).