Legal Opinion

Frimmel v. Hon. sanders/state

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided November 25, 2014No. 1 CA-SA 14-0166PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

JONES, Judge.

¶ 1 Defendant Bret Frimmel petitions for special action review of the trial court’s denial of his request for an evidentiary hearing pursuant to Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 98 S.Ct. 2674, 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978), and State v. Buccini, 167 Ariz. 550, 810 P.2d 178 (1991), to determine the validity of five search warrants. Because we find that Frimmel has made a substantial showing that the warrants were issued based upon supporting affidavits that the affiants knew or should have known contained recklessly false statements or omissions of relevant and known facts, we…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Franks v. DelawareSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  4. Sgro v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  5. United States v. Stanley Mills StanertCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. AEA Federal Credit Union v. Yuma Funding, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
  2. State v. ConnerCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2020
  3. State of Arizona v. Ronald James Sisco IICourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
  4. Lozano v. PaccoCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2020
  5. State of Arizona v. Ronald James Sisco IICourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API