Five anonymous callers claimed defendant was selling drugs. \u201cThe Government’s argument is unavailing because, as [USM] Judge Brisbois observed, \u2018[i]t is objectively unreasonable for an officer with over 10 years of experience to present a search warrant affidavit to a judge when that affidavit contains only uncorroborated information from anonymous callers.\u2019\u201d United States v. Loud, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77561 (D. Minn. May 7, 2018).<\/p>\n
CI\u2019s information that defendant would start a meth cook that evening was probable cause when it was coupled with information that defendant had amassed the materials, including a lot of pseudoephedrine, including from the state\u2019s \u201cmeth check\u201d system. State v. Craw<\/a>, 2018-Ohio-1769, 2018 Ohio App. LEXIS 1906 (3d Dist. May 7, 2018).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Five anonymous callers claimed defendant was selling drugs. \u201cThe Government’s argument is unavailing because, as [USM] Judge Brisbois observed, \u2018[i]t is objectively unreasonable for an officer with over 10 years of experience to present a search warrant affidavit to a … Continue reading