063903P.pdf   01/30/2009  United States  v.  Mohammed A. Kattaria
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  06-3903
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul   
   [PUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before the Court En Banc]
   Criminal case - criminal law. For the panel opinion see United States
   v. Kattaria, 503 F.3d 703 (8th Cir. 2007). In a case where a state
   court authorized a search warrant for aerial use of a thermal imaging
   device to detect excess heat from defendant's home and then issued three
   search warrants for the home based on the thermal signature obtained
   from the aerial search, all four of the search warrants were supported
   by traditional probable cause; alternatively, the evidence obtained
   through the warrants may not be suppressed under the good-faith exception
   to the exclusionary rule adopted in United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897
   (1984); the district court did not err in denying defendant's request
   for a Franks hearing, and the judgment of the district court is affirmed
   without considering the panel opinion's alternative ground for upholding
   the thermal imaging warrant; defendant's sentence is affirmed for the
   reasons stated in the panel opinion. Chief Judge Loken, with whom John R.
   Gibson joins, concurring.
  
063903P.pdf   10/05/2007  United States  v.  Mohammed A. Kattaria
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  06-3903
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul   
   [PUBLISHED] [Loken, Author, with John R. Gibson and Wollman,
   Circuit Judges]
   Criminal case - criminal law. Same Fourth Amendment reasonable
   suspicion standard that applies to Terry investigative stops should apply
   to the issuance of a purely investigative warrant to conduct a limited
   thermal imaging search from well outside the home; applying that
   standard, the first warrant issued in this case was clearly valid;
   alternatively, the district court did not err in finding that the thermal
   imaging warrant was supported by probable cause to believe that
   defendant was growing marijuana in his home; subsequent warrants for a
   physical search of the home were supported by probable cause; no error
   in denying a Franks hearing; sentence was not unreasonable.