W.D.Va.: Four corners rule does not apply to additional facts supporting good faith exception

Defendant’s original motion didn’t support standing but his brief did, and the court finds he was an overnight guest with standing. “At the outset, the court seriously doubts that the search warrant in this case was valid. While a magistrate’s decision to approve a warrant application is entitled to great deference, the magistrate still must have a ‘substantial basis’ to find ‘a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place.’ Illinois v. Gates, …. In this case, the warrant application included few—if—any facts connecting 109 Francis Drive NW with marijuana distribution. … However, because it was objectively reasonable for Detective Lovell to rely on the search warrant, this court need not finally decide whether the magistrate erred in approving the warrant application. … Instead, the court will proceed immediately to the good faith analysis.” The “four corners” rule doesn’t apply to good faith. “To determine ‘objective reasonableness,’ a court looks to the information included in the warrant affidavit and any ‘uncontroverted facts known to the officers but inadvertently not disclosed to the magistrate.’ United States v. McKenzie-Gude, 671 F.3d 452, 459 (4th Cir. 2011); United States v. Brown, 481 F. App’x 853, 855 (4th Cir. 2012) (‘We may consider information conveyed to the magistrate but not contained in the affidavit as well as uncontroverted facts known to the officer but inadvertently not presented to the magistrate.’)” United States v. Campbell, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20992 (W.D.Va. Feb. 22, 2016).