Category Archives: Informant hearsay

VT: A CI who is already in trouble with the police has an interest in truthfulness, and thus is likely more reliable

Statements against penal interest by CIs that are already in trouble are logically going to hurt the CI more if they turn out to be false, so the CI has an interest in being truthful. Reliability may thus be inferred … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay | Comments Off on VT: A CI who is already in trouble with the police has an interest in truthfulness, and thus is likely more reliable

MI: Controlled buys and corroborated CI was PC

The trial court erred in suppressing the search under the search warrant. There were controlled buys and a corroborated informant, and that was enough for probable cause. People v. Higgins, 2018 Mich. App. LEXIS 3355 (Oct. 18, 2018). Defendant’s right … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on MI: Controlled buys and corroborated CI was PC

DE: The affidavit for SW didn’t support the CI; motion to suppress granted

The affidavit for the search warrant here was based on a CI’s information and claim that he was constantly surveilled, but that wasn’t true because the officer admitted he didn’t see the alleged drug transaction go down. On the surface … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay | Comments Off on DE: The affidavit for SW didn’t support the CI; motion to suppress granted

CA6: Leaving house, doing drug deal, going back home is nexus

Leaving your house, conducting a drug sale, then returning to your house is nexus that there are drugs in the house. United States v. Houser, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 27671 (6th Cir. Sep. 28, 2018). “The magistrate judge presumed that … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Nexus | Comments Off on CA6: Leaving house, doing drug deal, going back home is nexus

W.D.Ky.: CI’s been buying heroin from def for 3 years, and that’s PC

The named CI’s statement she’d been buying heroin from defendant for three years was probable cause. United States v. Haqq, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165936 (W.D. Ky. Sep. 27, 2018).* Probable cause here was based on the CI’s statement and … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Probable cause | Comments Off on W.D.Ky.: CI’s been buying heroin from def for 3 years, and that’s PC

W.D.Pa.: Request for CI’s identity was speculative venture here and denied

Defendant’s claim he needs the CI’s name to attempt to come up with an alibi defense is essentially speculative and fishing for information without a real goal. It doesn’t overcome Roviaro. United States v. Noble, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161139 … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: Request for CI’s identity was speculative venture here and denied

CA7: Affiant’s omission of adverse info on CI that he had priors, was on probation, and paid didn’t undermine fresh, detailed, and corroborated info

The affiant left out adverse information about the CI including felony convictions, that he was on probation, and that he was paid. Still, the information from the CI was fresh, detailed, and significantly corroborated, and probable cause still existed. United … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay | Comments Off on CA7: Affiant’s omission of adverse info on CI that he had priors, was on probation, and paid didn’t undermine fresh, detailed, and corroborated info

CA9: Police supervisor’s alleged after-the-fact acquiescence in an alleged illegal search isn’t a § 1983 claim

A police supervisor’s post-hoc alleged acquiescence that he didn’t participate in an alleged illegal search doesn’t state a claim against the supervisor. Hunt v. Davis, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 26265 (9th Cir. Sep. 17, 2018). The officers corroborated enough of … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA9: Police supervisor’s alleged after-the-fact acquiescence in an alleged illegal search isn’t a § 1983 claim

E.D.Wis.: Impersonating a DEA agent in one’s car justifies automobile exception

Defendant was arrested for impersonating a DEA officer and using his car to do it. That gave probable cause to search the car. Defendant’s argument that there was an unreasonable inventory are off the mark. United States v. Wade, 2018 … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Informant hearsay, Seizure | Comments Off on E.D.Wis.: Impersonating a DEA agent in one’s car justifies automobile exception

D.S.C.: NC CI provided information for SC search; PC shown and GFE would apply

The CI was known to the Fayetteville NC PD, and he provided information there that panned out and led to arrests. Information was provided for North Myrtle Beach SC, and the CI was unknown in SC. Still, there was some … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay | Comments Off on D.S.C.: NC CI provided information for SC search; PC shown and GFE would apply

W.D.N.Y.: Violation of state law on informant hearsay [erroneously] imported into federal prosecution

The court finds the search warrant issued without probable cause as to the informant hearsay under New York law, and a hearing will be scheduled to determine whether to exclude. [Considering that state law violations generally have no affect on … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on W.D.N.Y.: Violation of state law on informant hearsay [erroneously] imported into federal prosecution

MA: Even if some information in CSLI affidavit was incorrect or false, redacting it still leaves PC

The search warrant for defendant’s CSLI was based on probable cause. Defendant challenges parts of the information as wholly inadequate to show probable cause. Redacting that information, however, still leaves probable cause. Commonwealth v. Robertson, 2018 Mass. LEXIS 563 (Aug. … Continue reading

Posted in Cell site location information, Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on MA: Even if some information in CSLI affidavit was incorrect or false, redacting it still leaves PC