Informant was merely stated to be \u201creliable\u201d without stating why. There was no effort to corroborate the informant\u2019s story. The good faith exception was not argued by the government so the court will not consider it on its own. Suppression granted. United States v. Shaw, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124693 (W.D. Ky. December 15, 2009).<\/p>\n
Drugs moving out of a mobile home was exigency to enter to prevent more from leaving until a search warrant could be obtained. United States v. Angeles-Guzman, 683 F. Supp. 2d 397 (E.D. N.C. 2010)*:<\/p>\n
. . . Here, the officers lawfully entered the Angeles-Guzman’s home and had probable cause to conduct a search of the home. At the time of entry, the officers initially secured the home pursuant to a valid exigency in anticipation of obtaining a search warrant. The officers then searched the residence with the good faith belief that Angeles-Guzman had consented to the search. If the officers had not obtained Angeles-Guzman’s ostensible consent through Galicia, the officers would have maintained the status quo in the home until a search warrant was obtained.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Officers had probable cause to search defendant\u2019s car because it would contain buy money from various drug transactions, including the CI\u2019s buy. United States v. Sierra, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10309 (W.D. La. January 20, 2010).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading