CA8: Truly bare bones affidavit for SW fails on GFE

Defendant here actually showed that the affidavit for search warrant was completely lacking in even an inference that defendant might have stolen property on his property. He was located nearby the primary offender, and his criminal history said nothing about the crime under investigation as to similarity of offenses. [The affidavit reads like it was all speculation.] Mentioned is the fact only the issuing magistrate found probable cause. The one the motion to suppress was referred to didn’t, and neither did the USDJ. (So no PC on a 2-1 vote, assuming the affidavit was actually scrutinized or the USMJ just signed off like some of them always do.) Truly bare bones. United States v. Ralston, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 33027 (8th Cir. Dec. 14, 2023).

Defendant is indicted for money laundering, and the search warrant for his cell phone is limited in the offense subject to the search. “Contrary to Kim’s argument, this conclusion does not require endorsement of a categorical rule that there is always probable cause to search a purported drug trafficker’s home in drug trafficking cases. Nor is this a case where the only basis for probable cause is an agent’s opinion. Rather, the culmination of Kim’s meetings to hand off large amounts of cash; agents’ observations of Kim leaving his residence with what they reasonably suspected was another bag of cash; and Agent Rivera’s experience-informed opinion that evidence would be found in Kim’s apartment–all against the backdrop of a monthslong investigation into money laundering networks associated with drug trafficking–supplies enough to make a ‘practical, common-sense determination that there is a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime’ would be found in the apartment.” United States v. Joon Kim, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222672 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 14, 2023).*