U.S. v. Hueston

In prosecution on drug and firearm charges, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion to suppress drugs and firearm seized from his apartment, even though Dist. Ct. conducted Franks hearing where it was learned that affidavit supporting application for warrant had omitted certain facts about tipster, who told police that he had purchased drugs from defendant in his apartment and about other facts surrounding police investigation of defendant’s drug activity. However, Dist. Ct. could properly find that police officer was credible in his claim that said omissions were not meant to mislead, and that police did not act with recklessness. Also, Dist. Ct.’s credibility finding was reasonable, where many omitted facts actually supported probable cause finding.