NV: Sealing affidavit without explanation or timely providing inventory not ground to suppress

The state showed reason to seal the affidavit for the search warrant in this murder case at the time of issuance, and the threshold isn’t high. [The court chides the defense for not citing law in support, then fails to cite law to support denial, and there’s plenty on the subject matter both ways.] The failure to timely provide the inventory wasn’t a Fourth Amendment violation or a ground to suppress. Bodden v. State, 126 Nev. 695, 367 P.3d 751 (Table) (Feb. 1, 2010) [just on Lexis]:

We determine that the following evidence demonstrated a need for secrecy: (1) Karen’s stories about Rob’s disappearance were inconsistent; (2) Karen’s stories about Rob’s disappearance conflicted with statements by other individuals; (3) allegations that Karen had stolen money from Rob; (4) Karen’s description of her marriage as “very rocky”; (5) the statement by Jennifer Stewart; (6) that Karen was upset that Rob’s family had accused her of murdering him but not that he was missing; and (7) a knife appearing to be the one missing from the marital residence being found near Rob’s body.

We also conclude that because the affidavit was sealed by the justice of the peace, the warrant did not need to: (1) recite a statement of probable cause on the face of the warrant, or (2) have the affidavit attached to it. Gameros-Perez, 119 Nev. at 541, 78 P.3d at 514. Further, the sealed affidavit was incorporated by reference in the warrant. Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its discretion in sealing the affidavit or err in denying Karen’s motion to suppress evidence.4

4 We decline to address Karen’s contention that the State was required to provide a factual basis for sealing the affidavit in the ex parte motion as Karen fails to cite to any legal authority for her assertion. See Cunningham v. State, 94 Nev. 128, 130, 575 P.2d 936, 938 (1978) (noting that when a party fails to cite to authority in support of their contentions, we need not review them on appeal). Moreover, Karen’s argument fails on its merits because a justice of the peace may refer to the affidavit itself when deciding whether to seal it. See 8A Fed. Proc. Criminal Procedure § 22:204 (Law. ed. 2005).

This entry was posted in Warrant execution. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.