I only wish this is how we would treat every case for a warrant. But it is not [1]. For us regular folk, this is Franks v. Delaware. To be “material,” a lie o

I only wish this is how we would treat every case for a warrant. But it is not [1]. For us regular folk, this is Franks v. Delaware. To be “material,” a lie or omission has to change the result. So, if the omitted information were added, or the lie deleted, the remainder of the information has to be insufficient to get the warrant. The problem is that the standard (usually probable cause) is so easy to meet that it can be met even with the lie deleted, or omitted information included. So it’s rare for even a blatant lie or deceitful omission to be material, and thus overturn the warrant. If, on the other hand, you lie to the government... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franks_v._Delaware https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franks_v._Delaware