The Oberlandesgericht München (1st Criminal Senate) dismissed on 19 October 2023 the prosecution's appeal against the Landgericht Memmingen's refusal to issue an arrest warrant (1 Ws 525/23), holding that no dringender Tatverdacht existed because the admissibility of ANOM chats — the only incriminating evidence — was at minimum doubtful under §§ 100a, 100b, 100e Abs. 6 Nr. 1, 479 Abs. 2 S. 1 StPO. The Senate confirmed that EncroChat case law was not transferable to ANOM: unlike EncroChat, neither the third-country server host nor the authorising judicial orders had been produced or identified, leaving only unverifiable assertions that such orders existed. The court expressly noted that the BGH had not yet ruled on ANOM admissibility and highlighted the dual structural deficiency — absent judicial oversight records and mass surveillance without individualised suspicion — as incompatible with the right to a fair trial. For the defence, the decision establishes that ANOM data alone cannot sustain a detention order in German proceedings where the third country and its court orders remain undisclosed.