PA: Officer’s experience alone can’t save a lack of PC

The evidence supporting alleged probable cause in this case was weak, and the officer’s experience doesn’t fill in the blanks of what was already weak. The search of defendant’s porch was suppressed by the trial court and affirmed. Commonwealth v. Whitlock, 2013 PA Super 105, 69 A.3d 635 (2013)*:

Officer Fetty’s experience in narcotics investigations is insufficient to compensate for the paucity of incriminating observations in this case. In recent years, our Supreme Court and this Court have issued a series of cases addressing the degree to which an officer’s experience can inform a court’s inquiry into the presence of probable cause. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Thompson, 985 A.2d 928 (Pa. 2009); Commonwealth v. Dunlap, 941 A.2d 671 (Pa. 2007). While Thompson expressed certain doubts about the view espoused in Dunlap regarding the degree to which a police officer’s experience can contribute to establishing the presence of probable cause, Thompson left undisturbed one fundamental proposition: “[A] court cannot simply conclude that probable cause existed based upon nothing more than the number of years an officer has spent on the force. Rather, the officer must demonstrate a nexus between his experience and the search, arrest, or seizure of evidence.” Thompson, 985 A.2d at 935 (quoting Dunlap, 941 A.2d at 676).