United States v. Ryan Canfield

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plaintiffs must show that “the alleged falsehoods or omissions were necessary to the [issuing] judge’s probable cause finding” (alteration in original
• stating that if informant proves to be truthful about even innocent details, “there is a higher probability the incriminating facts are true”
• stating that if informant proves to be truthful about even innocent details, \there is a higher probability the incriminating facts are true\
• requiring that a defendant seeking suppression show, inter alia , that \the alleged falsehoods or omissions were necessary to the [issuing] judge's probable cause finding.\ (quoting United States v. Salameh , 152 F.3d 88 , 113 (2d Cir. 1998) )
• vacating suppression order and finding probable cause in case where “neither informant has any history of past reliability” despite errors and omissions in the application
• “ultimate inquiry is whether, after putting aside erroneous information ... ‘there remains a reside of independent and lawful information sufficient to support probable cause’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).