TN: Named eyewitness to shooting was not a “CI” needing corroboration

The “CI” in this homicide case was a known eyewitness who knew the defendant. He was a citizen informant, not a mere snitch, and his version had a presumption of reliability. State v. Dotson, 2014 Tenn. LEXIS 694 (September 30, 2014).

Defendant drove himself to the hospital with a gunshot wound to the head. A police officer stationed outside with his car encountered a woman who identified herself as his wife who had already visited defendant in the hospital. She said they lived together and ran a business together. She had apparent authority to consent to a search. It turned out she was living with him but not married. State v. Portman, 2014-Ohio-4343, 2014 Ohio App. LEXIS 4245 (2d Dist. September 26, 2014).*

Defendant’s original motion did not mention facial invalidity of the search warrant, so that claim is waived. Considering the merits, however, it isn’t. United States v. Miller, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138016 (E.D. Mich. September 30, 2014).*

This entry was posted in Apparent authority, Informant hearsay, Motion to suppress. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.