U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon recently ruled on motions related to Donald Trump’s legal challenges following a raid on Mar-a-Lago and the subsequent handling of attorney-client privilege. Here are the key points from her recent order:
- Franks Hearing Motion Denied: Cannon denied Trump’s motion for a Franks hearing, which is used to challenge the validity of a search warrant by alleging material false statements or omissions in the warrant affidavit. She found that Trump did not meet the threshold to show any material falsehoods or omissions that would warrant such a hearing.
- Evidentiary Suppression Hearing Ordered: Despite denying the Franks hearing, Cannon ordered an evidentiary suppression hearing. This hearing will specifically address Trump’s contention that the special counsel improperly pierced attorney-client privilege using the crime-fraud exception. At this hearing, both sides will present documentary and testimonial evidence to support their positions.
- Fresh Factual Findings Required: Cannon ruled that she must make fresh factual findings on whether the crime-fraud exception was appropriately applied. This involves determining whether the attorney’s assistance Trump received was in furtherance of criminal or fraudulent activities or closely related to them.
- Terms in Attachment B Need Clarification: The judge highlighted that terms like “national defense information” and “Presidential Records” listed in Attachment B of the search warrant lack clear, generally understood meanings. She noted that law enforcement needed further clarification to identify such materials as seizable property without ambiguity.
- Legal Discretion: Cannon emphasized that there is no legal impediment preventing Trump from developing a factual record to challenge the government’s assertions regarding the crime-fraud exception and attorney-client privilege.
Overall, while denying one motion, Judge Cannon’s order sets the stage for a detailed evidentiary hearing to address the complex legal issues raised by Trump’s challenges to the handling of the Mar-a-Lago raid and the invocation of attorney-client privilege exceptions.
Sources:
lawrota.com 
Leave a comment