\u201cThe bare assertion that defendant departed his home prior to engaging in a drug transaction does not \u2018directly connect the residence with the suspected drug dealing activity.\u2019 Id.\u201d Peffer, 880 F.3d at 272-73 (quoting Brown, 828 F.3d at 383-84). The affidavit for the search warrant failed to show nexus to the house. Nevertheless, the search warrant survives by the good faith exception. \u201cThe affidavit in this case connects defendant to the vehicle, the vehicle to the house, and the house to defendant. Washington confirms that these are the precise connections required to overcome the \u2018so lacking in minimal indicia\u2019 test in order for the good faith exception to apply. Washingon, 380 F.3d at 242-43. Accordingly, although this warrant lacked probable cause, the good faith exception is applicable in this case.\u201d United States v. Elizondo, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68232 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 24, 2018).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cThe bare assertion that defendant departed his home prior to engaging in a drug transaction does not \u2018directly connect the residence with the suspected drug dealing activity.\u2019 Id.\u201d Peffer, 880 F.3d at 272-73 (quoting Brown, 828 F.3d at 383-84). The … Continue reading