E.D.Pa.: SW affidavit didn’t show def a drug dealer to use assumption drug dealers keep stash at home

As a general rule, drug dealers keep their drugs at home, and that’s sufficient to get a search warrant for their home. Here, however, the affidavit falls far short of showing that defendant was a drug dealer. He was just a user. Moreover, the Third Circuit has already held warrant showings like this are insufficient to invoke the good faith exception. United States v. Rodriguez, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124814 (E.D. Pa. September 8, 2014):

Prior cases in the Third Circuit involving home searches of alleged drug traffickers have required a more significant connection between the residences and drug activity to uphold warrants under the good faith exception. In Stearn, the Third Circuit upheld several search warrants for homes connected to a Philadelphia narcotics operation under the good faith exception. 597 F.3d at 563-70. The affidavits included tips from credible informants and observations of the defendants entering and exiting the residences with large bags. Id. Similarly, in Hodge, the officers based their affidavit on the defendant’s arrest for possession of cocaine at a transaction with a known drug user. 246 F.3d at 305. While the Third Circuit upheld the search of the defendant’s home based on probable cause, the court noted that it would have been objectively reasonable for the officers to rely on the magistrate’s determination. Id. at 309. No such evidence is present in this case. Rodriguez was never implicated by an informant’s tip or by wiretap intercepts. Neither Rodriguez nor Castro was observed entering or exiting Rodriguez’s apartment while carrying suspected contraband. Likewise, neither man was observed transporting drugs or drug proceeds in the Ford Fusion. Finally, Rodriguez was never found or suspected to be in possession of drug paraphernalia or proceeds during his September 6th encounter with Martinez and Almeida-Urias. Based on the dearth of evidence linking the drug conspiracy to Rodriguez’s apartment, the Court concludes that no objectively reasonable police officer could believe that the search of Rodriguez’s apartment was lawful. See Zimmerman, 277 F.3d at 438.