United States v. Maurice Turner, 953 F.3d 1017

Maurice Turner lived at 2023 Davis Street; neighboring 2024 Davis Street was under investigation for drug trafficking tied to Quentin Johnson.
On April 11, 2017, a confidential informant (CI) made a controlled buy from Johnson after officers observed Johnson leave 2024 and meet the CI.
On April 12, 2017, police conducted a trash pull from curb in front of 2023 Davis Street and recovered drug residue and mail/ID showing Anjanette Carter lived at 2023. A rental car rented by Turner was parked in the driveway.
April 13, 2017: officers obtained search warrants for 2023 (Detective Wood) and later 2024 (Detective Murphy) Davis Street; warrants relied on CI information, trash-pull results, and Turner’s criminal history.
April 20, 2017: execution of the warrants at 2023 recovered two firearms and marijuana; Turner admitted presence of firearms and later gave statements to police.
Turner moved to suppress evidence and statements, arguing the 2023 warrant affidavit contained false or omitted material facts (Franks attack); the district court denied suppression without a Franks hearing; Turner entered a conditional guilty plea and appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Probable cause for warrant to search 2023 Davis St.	Affidavit was misleading; CI and trash evidence unreliable so no probable cause	Affidavit included trash-pull evidence, Turner’s drug convictions, rental car in driveway — sufficient for probable cause	Warrant was supported by probable cause; facially valid
Entitlement to a Franks hearing (alleged false statements/omissions)	Affidavit omitted exculpatory or clarifying facts about Johnson/2024 and included deceptive statements about trash pull and CI	Alleged omissions/falsehoods were speculative and not shown to be intentional/reckless or necessary to probable cause	No Franks hearing; Turner failed to make the substantial preliminary showing required
Reliability/staleness of CI information	CI’s past purchases from 2023 were unspecified and possibly stale; judge failed to independently assess CI credibility under Iowa law	CI confirmation (drive-by on April 12) and other recent facts made CI reliability noncritical to probable cause	CI omission/staleness arguments insufficient to require Franks hearing; credibility not central to probable cause here
Suppression of Turner’s statements as fruits of poisonous tree	Statements should be suppressed because obtained after an invalid search warrant	Because warrant was supported by probable cause and no Franks showing, statements admitted voluntarily and lawfully	Statements not suppressed; fruit-of-the-tree claim failed

Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978) (standard for challenging truthfulness/omissions in warrant affidavits)
United States v. Snyder, 511 F.3d 813 (8th Cir. 2008) (Franks preliminary-showing standard)
United States v. Gabrio, 295 F.3d 880 (8th Cir. 2002) (intentional/reckless omission requirement)
United States v. Thurmond, 782 F.3d 1042 (8th Cir. 2015) (trash-pull evidence can support probable cause)
United States v. Smith, 581 F.3d 692 (8th Cir. 2009) (prior convictions plus trash evidence supports probable cause)
United States v. Carnahan, 684 F.3d 732 (8th Cir. 2012) (omission of informant details not warranting Franks hearing when informant credibility not central)
United States v. Perry, 531 F.3d 662 (8th Cir. 2008) (no bright-line staleness test)
United States v. Summage, 481 F.3d 1075 (8th Cir. 2007) (staleness evaluated in context)
United States v. Maxim, 55 F.3d 394 (8th Cir. 1995) (old information may combine with recent facts to support probable cause)
United States v. Leisure, 844 F.2d 1347 (8th Cir. 1988) (speculation insufficient to require Franks hearing)