United States v. James Arnold

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that a defendant is entitled to a Franks hearing when he makes a “substantial preliminary showing” that probable cause would be lacking if deliberately or recklessly omitted facts had been included in the warrant application
• “[W]e disagree with Arnold’s argument ... that a misrepresentation occurred when the affidavit omitted that the confidential informant was ‘working off a charge.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).