D.S.D.: CI in custody on phone with defendant luring defendant to meeting was corroborated

Officers had a man in custody who agreed to be a CI and called the defendant. The informant was on the phone with the defendant and gave information where the defendant would be going to meet up with the CI. Officers were waiting where the defendant would show up, and, as stated by the CI, the defendant showed up. While the CI was a first time informant, his details were corroborated as he was giving them out, and this was probable cause. United States v. Ramos-Rogel, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36475 (D. S.D. April 13, 2010).*

Two threats, a bomb threat and a shooting threat, were called in to a school. Officers responding elected to lockdown the school. A second bomb threat was called in. The police made a “split second” decision that the bomb threat was an attempt to get people out for a shooting. Two CIs told police that plaintiff was the probable caller, and the call was related to potential gang violence. Police went to the plaintiff’s house, and called out. The door was unlocked, and they went in and searched. The police had qualified immunity in how they responded to the threats. Armijo v. Peterson, 601 F.3d 1065 (10th Cir. 2010).*

Negligent non-material misstatements did not avoid application of the good faith exception. United States v. Newton, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36529 (N.D. Tex. April 13, 2010).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.