MO: PC lacking and SW was stale, but GFE exception saves it anyway

The affidavit for the search warrant here failed for two reasons. First, it failed to show a substantial basis for finding probable cause from two informants’ information that was not properly corroborated [although later court says they kind of corroborate each other]. Second, it failed staleness because the informant information relied upon didn’t show that the sought-after things would still likely be there. The state argued as to both that the inferences from the affidavit as a whole measured up. Nevertheless, the good faith exception applies. The affidavit is not “so lacking” in probable cause that it cannot be relied upon. The two CIs’ affidavits support each other and corroborate each other enough to just get over the good faith exception low hurdle [my words]. The trial court said it was suppressing because of a systemic failure that is “utterly” unsupported by the record. State v. Robinson, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 154 (February 17, 2015):

Additionally, the trial court’s finding that this case “demonstrates systemic negligence in regard to the careless preparation of warrant affidavits, which is a recurring problem of law enforcement of this State,” is utterly without support in the record. The trial court pointed solely and broadly to the Wilbers case for support that the problem of insufficient support for warrants is recurring and widespread. But this finding by the trial court — made without an evidentiary hearing, any evidence or even a statement on the record or in the judgment from the trial court as to its own experience with the particular law enforcement agency– fails to take into account that the Wilbers court allowed the admission of the evidence under the good-faith exception, the very exception the trial court declined to apply in this case. On this bare record, we fail to see how similar deficiencies in affidavits from two different law enforcement agencies filed years apart establishes systemic negligence.