The search warrant was facially stale, having been issued on February 7th where the affidavit was signed on January 7th. It\u2019s shown to be a typographical error that may be overlooked. The search warrant was accompanied by its affidavit, and that made it particular for execution. United States v. Hobson, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108950 (E.D. Mich. June 29, 2018).<\/p>\n
The CI recording the controlled buy coming into evidence absconded and can\u2019t be found for trial. The government has shown a prima facie case of his consent to the recording to make it admissible. The CI\u2019s statements, however, cannot be used as evidence of guilt because it would violate confrontation. United States v. Jackson, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109272 (S.D. Ill. June 29, 2018).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The search warrant was facially stale, having been issued on February 7th where the affidavit was signed on January 7th. It\u2019s shown to be a typographical error that may be overlooked. The search warrant was accompanied by its affidavit, and … Continue reading