W.D.N.Y.: CI was a known regular and brought with the affidavit for SW; issuing magistrate could question

“Here, probable cause existed for the Niagara Falls City Court judge to issue the search warrant for Walnut Avenue. Law enforcement agents presented information through their affidavit that included the confidential informant’s reliability and the results of two controlled purchases. … Additionally, the agents brought the confidential informant with them when presenting the search warrant application. The judge already knew from prior interactions that the confidential informant was reliable. The judge also would have been able to assess the confidential informant’s credibility face-to-face.” United States v. Hayes, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76627 (W.D.N.Y. June 13, 2016).

Considering the stringent standard for reconsideration motions, defendant’s complaints about the credibility determinations on the hearing on his motion to suppress aren’t enough. There was no error of law pointed out. United States v. Wesselhoft, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75078 (D.V.I. June 9, 2016).*

This entry was posted in Informant hearsay. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.