M.D.Pa.: Trash pull alone didn’t add up to PC, but GFE applies

The affidavit didn’t have enough information to corroborate the trash pull, but the evidence is apparent that the officer relied on it in good faith. United States v. Ray, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 207885 (M.D. Pa. Nov. 6, 2020):

This is especially true given the paucity of binding precedent concerning trash pulls. Officers acting in good faith must have “a reasonable knowledge of what the law prohibits.” Stearn, 597 F.3d at 561-62 (quoting United States v. Zimmerman, 277 F.3d 426, 438 (3d Cir. 2002)). But the limited case law from our court of appeals offers only guideposts as to the sufficiency of probable cause affidavits based on trash-pull evidence. Therefore, even an exceptionally well-informed officer could have reasonably believed that the affidavit was legally sufficient. In light of this jurisprudential morass, we find that Detective Martin credibly and reasonably believed that he had probable cause and a valid warrant to search Davis-Ray’s home. See Hodge, 246 F.3d at 309 (justifying officer’s reliance on warrant given the “unsettled jurisprudence governing cases of this type”); see also Pavulak, 700 F.3d at 664 (justifying officer’s reliance given unsettled law in circuit at the time of affidavit’s filing and competing out-of-circuit views).

We conclude, based upon the evidence adduced at the hearing and a careful assessment of Detective Martin’s credibility, that Detective Martin held a sincere and objectively reasonable belief that the search warrant for Davis-Ray’s home was supported by probable cause. Hence, we will not exclude evidence obtained during the ensuing home search. As a result, we need not consider whether evidence obtained after the home search is inadmissible as fruit of the poisonous tree.