VA: Exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in revos

The exclusionary rule, along with a host of other things, doesn’t apply in revocation proceedings. Commonwealth v. Jackson, 2025 Va. LEXIS 57 (Nov. 20, 2025) (citing treatise § 9.16).

The collective knowledge doctrine applies to traffic stops. United States v. Frantz, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 226259 (E.D. Ky. Nov. 18, 2025).*

“On this record, we hold that as a matter of law the evidence provided in support of the 205 Curtis Street search warrant failed to satisfy the basis of knowledge requirement of the Aguilar-Spinelli test …. The general allegation that the informant was ‘ware that narcotics are kept inside the location’ provides no indication ‘that the information was based upon personal observation’ …. Likewise, the informant’s statement that at some unidentified point in time the informant had conducted a narcotics transaction at that address ‘did not describe defendant’s activities with sufficient particularity to warrant an inference of personal knowledge’ … Nor was the information conveyed by the informant corroborated by police observation …. Accordingly, the informant’s statements fail to meet the requirements of Aguilar-Spinelli and, because there are no other allegations in the search warrant affidavit to establish ‘a reasonable belief that an offense has been or is being committed or that evidence of a crime may’ have been found at 205 Curtis Street …, the search warrant for that address was not supported by probable cause, and the evidence seized there should have been suppressed.” People v. Berry, 2025 N.Y. LEXIS 1911 (Nov. 20, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Collective knowledge, Exclusionary rule, Informant hearsay. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.