CA11: Def’s 4A challenge doesn’t satisfy successor habeas standard; not even habeas standard

“First, Fails argues that his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated when he was arrested because he was never read his Miranda rights and never signed a card waiving those rights. Second, he argues that his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated because he was never served a warrant before his arrest and never notified of the items that were to be seized under a search warrant. Finally, he argues that the state’s material witness never signed a sworn witness statement before the arrest warrant was validated, as required under Florida law and Fed. R. Crim. P. 3. In support of his claims, Fails cites Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103, 95 S. Ct. 854, 43 L. Ed. 2d 54 (1975).” In re Fails, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 19470 (11th Cir. July 16, 2018).

Based on everything provided by the CI, defendant doesn’t get a Franks hearing as to the existence of probable cause or a potential (at worst, and probably not) negligent reference to address. United States v. Thrasher, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117299 (D. Ore. July 14, 2018).*