E.D.Mo.: Older information in SW application substantiated by CI information from day before; not stale

Parts of the information were old, but the search warrant was not stale because a critical part of the affidavit showed that there was credible reason to believe drugs would be found there because of the CI’s observation the day before. United States v. Guthrie, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153062 (E.D. Mo. Sept. 9, 2019).*

The totality of circumstances provided reasonable suspicion to stop defendant’s car. First, the windows were obviously overtinted, which was evident from photographs. Second, there were repeated apparent hand to hand drug sales from a particular house where the same person came out to cars for a minute and then went back inside, and defendant participated in one. United States v. Maclin, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153012 (E.D. Wis. Sept. 9, 2019).*

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not filing a motion to suppress when there was nothing from the search used in the trial or a “motion to substantiate,” whatever that is. Crawford v. United States, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152956 (M.D. N.C. Sept. 9, 2019).*

This entry was posted in Ineffective assistance, Reasonable suspicion, Staleness. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.