“Rankin claimed counsel should have sought to suppress some of the evidence used at sentencing, but the exclusionary rule does not apply at sentencing.” United States v. Rankin, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100129 (D. Mont. June 15, 2018).
The affidavit for the search warrant for a meth lab was too generic in its words to provide probable cause that anything would be found. Even the attempt to supplement the affidavit with oral testimony was inadequate. The officer testified that the CI was reliable and had provided reliable information in the past. Still, the totality wasn’t probable cause. State v. Dill, 2018 S.C. LEXIS 77 (June 20, 2018).