United States v. Thomas, 835 F.3d 730

Police executed a June 2013 search warrant on William Thomas’s basement apartment and found a loaded Glock, a BB gun, ~17 grams of heroin, a digital scale, and documents in Thomas’s name. Thomas was arrested and indicted on three counts (felon-in-possession, heroin with intent to distribute, and possession of a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking).
The search warrant affidavit was based largely on a confidential informant’s (CI) first-hand account: the CI visited the apartment, observed Thomas (nicknamed “Burpy”) remove two handguns from clothing, described the guns and a threatening statement Thomas made, and identified the apartment.
Detective Gregory Jacobson corroborated the CI’s report via police records (matching nickname, description, gang affiliation, address), a photo identification by the CI, and driving the CI to the location; the CI swore to the affidavit before the issuing judge.
At the suppression hearing Thomas argued the warrant was defective because the government withheld information about the CI’s identity, background, motives, and reliability (invoking Brady), and sought a Franks hearing alleging reckless falsehoods in the affidavit.
The district court denied suppression, finding probable cause supported the warrant and Thomas had not shown the need for a Franks hearing; Thomas entered a conditional guilty plea reserving the suppression issue and appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether withholding CI identity violated Brady at suppression stage	Thomas: failing to disclose CI details violated due process and could have affected probable-cause finding	Government: CI identity may be withheld under Roviaro/Banks; disclosure not requested and CI’s details were not material	Affirmed — even assuming Brady applies, no suppression or prejudice; CI info not material
Whether affidavit contained deliberate or reckless falsehoods (Franks)	Thomas: affidavit omitted CI problems and was recklessly misleading, entitling him to a Franks hearing	Government: affidavit was corroborated and CI swore to it; no deliberate falsehoods shown	Held — Thomas failed to meet Franks standard; no hearing required
Whether issuing judge had probable cause to issue warrant	Thomas: lack of CI reliability and omitted details vitiated probable cause	Government: corroboration, CI detail, photo ID, address match, and CI testimony provide ample probable cause	Held — issuing judge’s probable-cause finding was supported and entitled to deference
Whether any error is reviewable for plain error (procedural)	Thomas: appellate review warranted for Brady claim despite lack of district-level Brady argument	Government: no plain error because law unsettled and Brady not raised below	Held — plain-error review not available as law is unsettled; regardless, claim fails on the merits

Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (constitutional duty to disclose exculpatory/impeachment evidence)
Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (standard for warrant-affidavit challenge and entitlement to hearing)
Roviaro v. United States, 353 U.S. 53 (protecting CI identity unless relevant/necessary to defense)
United States v. Banks, 405 F.3d 559 (Seventh Circuit discussion of CI disclosure and Roviaro analysis)
United States v. Glover, 755 F.3d 811 (factors for evaluating probable cause from CI information)
United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (Brady materiality standard: reasonable probability of a different outcome)
United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (plain-error review requirements)