United States v. Brunette

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that statement that “all” seized images were pornographic when at least two of thirty-three were not was misleading, but did not justify suppression
• holding that agent’s conclusory statement that image met the statutory definition was not sufficiently detailed and factual
• holding that appending a sample of the offending material to a warrant request was preferable
• holding that agent's conclusory statement that image met the statutory definition was not sufficiently detailed and factual
• holding that warrant was issued without probable cause where affiant did not give detailed factual description of images and magistrate did not independently review the images
• holding that warrant was issued without probable cause where affiant did not give detailed factual description of images and magistrate did not independently review the images

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).