Which scenario would not defeat the good-faith exception to suppression?

• A. A minor clerical error in the warrant.
• B. The magistrate's official bias against the defendant.
• C. The warrant lacked probable cause.
• D. The police knowingly misrepresented facts to the magistrate.

Answer: (A)

The good-faith exception allows admission of evidence seized under a warrant when police acted reasonably in relying on that warrant, even if the warrant later turns out to be defective. A minor clerical error in the warrant is just an administrative slip and does not undermine the officer’s belief in the warrant’s validity or his reliance on it. Because the error is trivial and does not affect probable cause or the magistrate’s authority, the evidence can still be admitted under the good-faith rule.

By contrast, if the magistrate is biased against the defendant, the warrant’s neutrality is compromised, so reasonable officers could not rely in good faith on that decision. If the warrant lacks probable cause, there was no valid basis to issue it in the first place, defeating good faith. And if the police knowingly misrepresented facts to the magistrate, reliance on the warrant would be tainted by deceit, so the good-faith exception would not apply.