United States v. Tibolt

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “the ‘substantial preliminary showing’ requirement needed to obtain a Franks hearing is not lightly met”
• upholding warrantless search for injured or immobilized victim, based on reasonable belief that home was location of security alarm, upon finding back door unlocked and receiving no response to calls inside residence
• upholding denial of motion for new trial, despite newly discovered evidence contradicting officer’s testimony, where officer lacked accurate memory rather than perjuring himself, and because evidence was of “marginal direct probative value”
• appellate court “properly defers” to trial court on motion for a new trial
• officers responding to security alarm had probable cause despite no signs of a break-in when they found closed, unlocked door and received no response to calls
• police responding to home security alarm were justified in entering residence without a warrant when the back door was unlocked and police feared a burglar or possible injured persons were inside

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).