CA6: Affidavit about smell of MJ from house was not so bare bones GFE didn’t apply

“Even if the search-warrant affidavit at issue lacked probable cause, the district court did not err in denying Noble’s motion to suppress because the good-faith exception applies. The search-warrant affidavit is not bare bones.” The smell of marijuana coming from defendant’s house was enough. United States v. Noble, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 11998 (6th Cir. May 15, 2025).*

The informant hearsay here was corroborated. “Defendant’s contention that the warrant lacked probable cause because it rests on unreliable hearsay which tainted the entire affidavit is shortsighted. The affidavit does indicate that numerous cooperating individuals had advised that defendant was transporting large amounts of narcotics from Columbus, Ohio, and selling them out of the Cambridge Square apartment complex. And it does not provide further detail about these individuals or their credibility, reliability or accuracy. But it does not follow that the information conveyed by these individuals was not corroborated or independently found to be credible. [¶] What defendant conveniently overlooks is that Officer Cuccaro’s months-long investigation of defendant had independently confirmed and corroborated the general information conveyed by the ‘numerous cooperating individuals.’” United States v. Moore, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93614 (W.D. Pa. May 16, 2025).*

Shooting an unarmed protestor at point blank range was shown to be excessive here. Hart v. City of Grand Rapids, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 11780 (6th Cir. May 15, 2025) (2-1).*

This entry was posted in Excessive force, Good faith exception, Informant hearsay, Plain view, feel, smell. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.