{"id":52381,"date":"2022-05-16T05:42:27","date_gmt":"2022-05-16T10:42:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=52381"},"modified":"2022-05-16T07:28:55","modified_gmt":"2022-05-16T12:28:55","slug":"ca5-sw-affidavit-at-trial-violated-confrontation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=52381","title":{"rendered":"CA5: SW affidavit at trial violated confrontation"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>The government violated the confrontation clause by putting into evidence a search warrant affidavit to seek to give context to the CS\u2019s dealings with defendant. If that\u2019s so important, then the government should call him. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ca5.uscourts.gov\/opinions\/pub\/21\/21-50122-CR0.pdf\">United States v. Hamann<\/a>, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 13014 (5th Cir. May 12, 2022). Excellent discussion of informant hearsay and confrontation, and, in part:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<!--more-->\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\"><p>The government must advance a specific reason why it needs to provide inculpatory &#8220;context&#8221; for its investigation. For instance, it may do so if the defendant opens the door by &#8220;challeng[ing] the adequacy of [the] investigation.&#8221; Kizzee, 877 F.3d at 659. Otherwise, there is no reason why it cannot begin its account by explaining that it got a search warrant or that &#8220;a tip prompted&#8221; it to begin investigating a suspect. Sharp, F.4th at 582. Or, if it wishes to include the specifics of the tip, it is always free to call the tipster to testify. But it may not introduce &#8220;highly inculpatory out-of-court statement[s]&#8221; and call them nonhearsay context because their value for that purpose &#8220;pale[s] in comparison to the risk that the jury will consider&#8221; them for the truth of the matters asserted. Id.<\/p><p>Hamann says that&#8217;s what happened here. He maintains that Stanley&#8217;s testimony specifically linked him to the crime charged. The government disagrees. It urges that Stanley&#8217;s testimony was &#8220;for the purpose of explaining law enforcement&#8217;s investigation and did not point specifically to the defendant.&#8221; (quotation omitted). We agree with Hamann.<\/p><p>The challenged evidence linked Hamann to a meth-dealing conspiracy. It tended to prove that he sold several ounces-some before and some after meeting Davis-because Davis testified that he had sold Hamann only one ounce before the day he was arrested. But the tip described Hamann&#8217;s selling &#8220;multiple ounces.&#8221; It also described Hamann&#8217;s selling meth to the confidential source. For the reasons we described earlier, those are powerful links to a meth-dealing conspiracy.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The government violated the confrontation clause by putting into evidence a search warrant affidavit to seek to give context to the CS\u2019s dealings with defendant. If that\u2019s so important, then the government should call him. United States v. Hamann, 2022 &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=52381\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[124],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-52381","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-admissibility-of-evidence"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52381","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=52381"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52381\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":52383,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52381\/revisions\/52383"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=52381"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=52381"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=52381"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}