United States v. Jorgensen

The government challenges the district court's grant of defendant's motion to suppress physical evidence obtained as a result of a warrant search of defendant's home. The court concluded that the district court committed plain error in not considering whether there was a sufficient factual nexus between the constitutional violation - the recklessly untrue warrant affidavit - and defendant's statements to an agent two days later. In this case, the factors supporting this conclusion include the fact that defendant received Miranda warnings, the temporal proximity between defendant's arrest and his interview with the agent, several intervening circumstances weighing against suppression, and the unintentional error in describing for an issuing magistrate what the deputy believed to be probable cause was not purposeful or flagrant misconduct. Accordingly, the court reversed and remanded for further proceedings. View "United States v. Jorgensen" on Justia Law