D.Minn.: Def’s association with property was speculative and even GFE can’t save it

The affidavit for this search warrant was so lacking in probable cause that it could not be relied upon, even for good faith. All it showed was the defendant was someone who was associated with an apartment and might have kept stuff there. United States v. Johnson, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 200355 (D. Minn. Sep. 5, 2025), adopted 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 199032 (D. Minn. Oct. 8, 2025):

In short, the affidavit fails to establish probable cause for officers to search the apartment for Johnson’s firearms or firearm accessories. The affidavit does not include any specific facts demonstrating Johnson stored firearms at the apartment. Although ‘when the government has shown probable cause that a defendant illegally possessed a firearm, that showing naturally extends to his residence,’ … the affidavit does not establish Johnson treated the apartment like a residence, such that it would be fairly likely Johnson stored a firearm or firearm accessories at the apartment. … At most, the affidavit establishes Johnson’s physical presence at the apartment on one occasion and a friendship with the apartment’s tenant. Even according ‘great deference’ to the signing judge’s determination, that is nowhere near enough to establish probable cause.

As previously explained, the absence of a nexus between the apartment and Johnson is readily apparent. Supra, Part II. The affidavit lacks facts specifically connecting firearm(s) or accessories to the apartment. Instead, the sole premise for the nexus is associational. Indeed, Officer Moore simply states ‘Johnson is associated with this apartment [and therefore this apartment] could hold property of Johnson[.]’