CA5: Independent source doctrine saved SW from findings during protective sweep

The government satisfied its burden on the independent source doctrine without a remand being necessary. The entry was a protective sweep for weapons and the search warrant affidavit didn’t contain anything from that entry. Also, the district court’s order found that the evidence would have been obtained even without the alleged misconduct. United States v. Kittelberger, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 23922 (5th Cir. December 18, 2014).

Statutory implied consent can be withdrawn. That wasn’t an issue in McNeely. State v. Arrotta, 2014 Ida. LEXIS 340, December 18, 2014).

“The undersigned shares Defendant’s concern that the Affidavit is a little light on details supporting a showing that the informant has a proven ‘track record’ of supplying reliable information. The informant’s reliability takes on added significance particularly because the affidavit does not reflect that Officer Busso made any attempt to corroborate the alleged drug trafficking activity. However, the affidavit contained some indicia that the confidential informant provided reliable information in the past. The affidavit states that Officer Busso had worked with the informant in the past and the informant’s information had resulted in a weapons violation arrest. Defendant has pointed to no authority to support the argument that the informant’s information must have led to an arrest for a similar offense in order to be deemed reliable.” Close enough for government work; the good faith exception applies, too. United States v. Swopes, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174962 (E.D. Mo. October 22, 2014).*

This entry was posted in Independent source, Informant hearsay. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.