Roderick Larkins v. United States

Whether the Fourth Amendment permits a criminal prosecution to proceed where the search warrant was issued without a signed oath of affirmation by the aff­ iant) where the warrant failed to identify the defendant by name or address, and where the issuing judge later attempted to cure those constitutional defects through a post hoc declaration executed after the warrant had already been issued?

Whether the Fourth Amendment's Warrant Clause is satisfied when the issuing judge relies upon unrecorded and unpreseved ex parte telephone conversations with law enforcement, thereby preventing any meaningful judicial review of whether probable cause actually existed at the time the warrant was issued?

Whether a reviewing court may deny a motion to suppress by relying upon a post­ issuance judicial declaration rather than the facts actually presented to the issuing magistrate when the warrant was originally authorized? 4* Whether the principles announced in Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978), require suppression where substantial evidence demonstrates that the documents relied upon to establish probable cause were created after the warrant was issued, contained inconsistent signatures, and allegedly misrepresented the facts surr­ ounding the issuance of the warrant and affidavit?

Whether the good-faith exception recognized in United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984), applies where the warrant was alleged*to be facially deficient, unsupported by a valid oath of affirmation, and the constitutional defects were known or should have been known to the officers seeking the warrant?

Whether reasonable jurists could debate the denial of Petitioner's constitutional claims, within the meaning of Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000), where the underlying state prosecution had previously been dismissed with prejudice after the state court determined that the warrant proceedings' failed to satisfy state constitutional and statutory requirements governing probable cause?