2674, 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978). In Franks, the Supreme Court held that a facially sufficient search warrant could be invalid and evidence suppressed if the affidavit in support of the warrant contained materially false or misleading allegations. A defendant challenging the veracity of an affidavit must show deliberate falsity or reckless disregard; allegations of innocent mistake or negligence are insufficient. Id. at 171, 98 S.Ct. at 2684. In other words, evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant that was based on a misleading or incomplete affidavit will not be suppressed if the affiant acted in good faith. Thus, Leon’s good faith analysis is an integral part of a Franks analysis. See United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 923, 926, 104 S.Ct. 3405, 3421, 3422, 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984) (<HOLDING>). Title III requires that each application for
holding that consequence of deliberate violation of parental notification statute is suppression of statements made by defendant holding that only deliberate clear and unambiguous statements are judicial admissions holding that deliberate or reckless omissions of facts that tend to mislead are false statements for franks purposes holding that only reckless or deliberate police conduct will trigger suppression holding that technical violations of fedrcrimp 41 d require suppression if there was a deliberate disregard of the rule or if the defendant was prejudiced