Opinion ID: 723469
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Statement Regarding Financial Records

Text: 14 Kyle challenges as false Mason's statement in the affidavit that after he reviewed Kyle's financial records he found no legitimate source for the periodic cash deposits to her checking accounts. This portion of the affidavit states: 15 I reviewed Kyle's financial records to determine if there were corresponding cash withdrawals or other explanations for the periodic cash deposits into the two above described accounts. I have reviewed Kyle's financial records generated during the time period January, 1989 through October, 1990, including loan applications for her auto and home loans documents pertaining to at least six of her bank accounts and Kyle's 1989, 1990, and 1991 Forms 1040, U.S. Individual Tax Returns. These records do not reveal any identifiable legitimate source for the periodic cash deposits. 16 In her declaration submitted to the district court, Kyle stated she made periodic cash withdrawals from her credit union account and obtained cash by drawing on her credit cards, and that this cash was then deposited into her checking accounts. She contends her credit union account and her credit cards were legitimate sources for the cash deposits. 17 Upon its review of the trial record, the government brings to our attention Mason's declaration in response to Kyle's codefendant's motion to suppress. This declaration states Mason had reviewed Kyle's credit union account in the course of reviewing Kyle's financial records. The government concludes Mason's declaration conflicts with his affidavit in support of the search, and necessitates remand for a Franks hearing on this issue. 18 We decline to address this purported conflict. Instead, we affirm the district court's denial of Kyle's request for a Franks hearing on the ground that the affidavit, purged of its alleged falsity, is still sufficient to support a finding of probable cause. See Franks, 438 U.S. at 171-72; Meling, 47 F.3d at 1553. The effect of the misrepresentations and omissions on the existence of probable cause is considered cumulatively. We must determine, therefore, whether the affidavit, once corrected and supplemented, would provide a magistrate with a substantial basis for concluding that probable cause existed. Stanert, 762 F.2d at 782. 19 To purge the affidavit of the alleged falsity, it would be changed as follows. The last sentence of the passage of the affidavit quoted above would be deleted and replaced with the sentence: These records show periodic withdrawals of cash from her credit union account and draws of cash against her credit cards, which could be legitimate sources for the periodic cash deposits to her checking accounts. 20 As purged, the affidavit provides the following information. Kyle bought a truck that was used by Billy Senior and Billy Junior, and kept at their residence. Both Billy Senior and Billy Junior are known drug traffickers. Kyle's claimed source of cash for the truck, a loan from Joann Baker, is suspect. When the truck was seized Billy Senior claimed he owned the truck and that it was registered to William Hardy, when in fact it was registered to Kyle. Kyle and Billy Senior shared a bank account and records reveal several financial transactions between the two of them, even though Kyle previously claimed to have ceased all social and financial relations with Billy Senior. Kyle, as an IRS Revenue Officer, is uniquely positioned to provide useful expertise to a money laundering operation. 21 The affidavit, as purged, remains sufficient to support a finding of probable cause. We affirm the district court's denial of Kyle's request for a Franks hearing.