Anonymous tip was sufficiently corroborated to show probable cause

Defendant was not entitled to a Franks hearing. There was an anonymous tip, but it was significantly corroborated by defendant’s possession of a small amount of marijuana in his car. United States v. Yarbrough, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 30058, 2007 FED App. 0871N (6th Cir. December 20, 2007)* (unpublished):

Yarbrough concedes the presence of marijuana in the car, yet maintains the small amount indicates personal use. Even if we accept this premise, the presence of any marijuana in a vehicle outside of a residence where police have received an anonymous tip of drug activity contributes to a finding of probable cause. See Elkins, 300 F.3d at 659-60 (anonymous tip plus smell of marijuana provided probable cause for search warrant); United States v. Smith, 783 F.2d 648, 651-52 (6th Cir. 1986) (tip from confidential informant plus marijuana plant growing outside of house provided probable cause).

Plaintiff did not show a future likelihood of being searched under a local ordinance to justify finding an Art. III case or controversy. Sapienza v. Forest Preserve Dist., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94777 (N.D. Ill. December 28, 2007).*

The trial court’s jury instruction on consent to a strip search accurately reflected the law that consent did not have to be “express” as long as the defendant officer would reasonably believe that consent had been given. Plaintiff was entitled to a new trial in a § 1983 case for an illegal search where the defendant put plaintiff’s drug history in over objection. It was more prejudicial than relevant. Reppert v. Marino, 259 Fed. Appx. 481 (3d Cir. 2007)* (unpublished).