United States v. Downing, 2:23-cr-00263

On August 31, 2022, the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD) executed a search warrant at 3916 Delachaise Street, seizing drug evidence and cell phones connected to defendants Christopher Downing and Iris Lewis.
The search warrant was based on an affidavit linking Downing to an armed robbery via surveillance footage, a recovered cell phone, and photos associating Downing and Lewis with the getaway car and items used in the robbery.
Probable cause for the search warrant was supported by evidence including: Downing’s use of a phone near the robbery site, the vehicle connected to Lewis, and photos matching clothing worn during the robbery.
Defendants were subsequently indicted for Hobbs Act robbery, firearm possession during a crime of violence, and possession with intent to distribute heroin.
Defendants moved to suppress the evidence, arguing the affidavit contained intentional or reckless misrepresentations and lacked sufficient probable cause.
The district court ruled on a consolidated motion to suppress, including prior pro se motions from Downing, ultimately denying the suppression request.

Issue	Downing/Lewis's Argument	Government's Argument	Held
Whether search warrant affidavit contained deliberate/reckless falsehoods (Franks claim)	Affidavit had intentional/reckless misrepresentations and omissions that undermined probable cause	Affidavit was truthful and factual; any minor discrepancies were neither deliberate nor reckless	No sufficient showing of deliberate/reckless falsehoods; Franks claim denied
Whether affidavit was “bare bones” and lacked probable cause	Affidavit was conclusory, lacked substantive facts linking residence to robbery evidence	Affidavit provided sufficient details: phone recovery, surveillance, photos linking Downing to crime, etc.	Affidavit was not bare bones; probable cause was sufficiently established
Application of Leon good-faith exception	Good-faith exception should not apply due to intentional misrepresentations and lack of probable cause	Officers’ reliance on the warrant was objectively reasonable given sufficient factual detail	Good-faith exception applied; exclusionary rule inapplicable
Suppression of evidence based on Fourth Amendment grounds	Evidence was obtained in violation of Fourth Amendment due to above deficiencies	Evidence admissible as search was constitutional, warrant adequately supported	Motion to suppress denied

Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (U.S. 1983) (establishes totality-of-the-circumstances test for probable cause)
United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (U.S. 1984) (creates the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule for evidence obtained under a search warrant)
Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (U.S. 1978) (sets standard for voiding warrants due to intentionally/recklessly false affidavits)
United States v. Brown, 941 F.2d 1300 (5th Cir. 1991) (probable cause standard for search warrants)
United States v. Newman, 472 F.3d 233 (5th Cir. 2006) (probable cause requires fair probability under totality of circumstances)
United States v. Satterwhite, 980 F.2d 317 (5th Cir. 1992) (distinguishes “bare bones” affidavits from those sufficient for probable cause)