In this Q&A episode, I answer a question about search warrants and explain the difference between a standard motion to suppress and the all-important Franks motion.

Responding to a listener’s question, I break down how police affidavits are used to obtain search warrants, what happens when there’s a lack of probable cause, and what it means if law enforcement lies—or leaves out key information—when seeking a warrant.

I walk you through how the Fourth Amendment protects your privacy, how courtroom strategies develop, and why it’s so important to keep solid communication with your defense attorney if you’re ever facing criminal charges.

Whether you’re caught up in your own case or just curious how all this plays out in real life, this episode gives you a practical, step-by-step guide straight from my experience in the trenches.

Moments

00:00 Under the Fourth Amendment, law enforcement must present a sworn statement or affidavit to a judge, establishing probable cause and a nexus between the search location and evidence of criminal activity.

03:41 Exclusionary rule: Illegally obtained evidence is inadmissible in court; supports motions like suppressing evidence or Frank's motion.

08:35 Discuss police report discrepancies at Frank's hearings; consult your lawyer for strategy and communication.

Here are my top 3 takeaways:

Know the Difference:

A traditional motion to suppress focuses exclusively on what’s contained within the “four corners” of the search warrant affidavit. If the affidavit lacks probable cause, that’s your argument.

A Franks motion takes it a step further—challenging the truthfulness of the statements in that affidavit. If police knowingly lied or omitted critical information, the entire warrant (and seized evidence) can be thrown out.

Procedural Impact Matters:

Motion to suppress hearings are mostly decided on the documents—you don’t typically get to call witnesses or present new evidence.

Franks motions can turn into full-blown evidentiary hearings, where you get to subpoena officers, cross-examine them, and introduce evidence showing intentional falsehoods or omissions.

Strategic Use:

Skilled defense attorneys often file both types—creating multiple avenues to contest the evidence and strengthen your client’s defense.

Got a question you want answered on the podcast? Call 614-859-2119 and leave us a voicemail. Steve will answer your question on the next podcast!

Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.

Recorded at Channel 511.

Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.

Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.

He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.

Steve has unique experience handling numerous high-publicity cases that have garnered national attention.

For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense.

Copyright 2025 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law

Mentioned in this episode:

Circle 270 Media Podcast Consultants

Circle 270 Media® is a podcast consulting firm based in Columbus, Ohio, specializing in helping businesses develop, launch, and optimize podcasts as part of their marketing strategy. The firm emphasizes the importance of storytelling through podcasting to differentiate businesses and engage with their audiences effectively. www.circle270media.com