W.D.Tenn.: Anonymous crimestoppers report was uncorroborated and did not provide probable cause

An anonymous crimestoppers report was uncorroborated and did not provide probable cause for a search. United States v. Allgood, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 200729 (W.D. Tenn. Nov. 28, 2018):

Clearly, the information provided to the Crime Stoppers Hotline was from an anonymous tipster or a party who was unknown to the law enforcement officers at the time of the search, as opposed to information that had been provided by a confidential informant, a person known or having a prior relationship with the authorities. (ECF No. 44, 10-12.) Despite the Government’s contention that the anonymous tip was confidential and officers could rely on it, the Sixth Circuit has held that nothing is presumed to be reliable regarding information from an anonymous tipster whose identity, credibility and reliability are all unknown. Castro, 364 F. App’x at 235. Corroboration of the tip information is necessary.

The Magistrate Judge specifically found that the officers lacked reasonable belief to enter the apartment that was leased by a third-party solely based on the information provided above by the anonymous source. It is uncontested by the Government that the Defendant was a nonresident of this apartment. (ECF No. 50, 17: 4-6.) Despite lacking a copy of the actual Crime Stoppers anonymous tip, the Magistrate Judge extensively referred to the officers’ testimony, which indicated the officers corroborated little of the information provided by the tip. The officers saw a gold Nissan parked outside the apartment but failed to corroborate any of the information provided by the anonymous tipster. (ECF Nos. 43, Exhibit 1, CD, 50-1 & 50, 36:1-6). The officers failed to run the tag of the Nissan prior to entering the apartment to see who the registered owner was or take any other measures to verify if Allgood was present in the apartment. (ECF No. 50, 21: 11-17.)