A single telephone call 6 weeks before the search warrant was sought was stale. Nothing in between. \u201cIn the context of drug crimes, \u2018information goes stale very quickly \u201cbecause drugs are usually sold and consumed in a prompt fashion.\u201d\u2019\u201d And, the good faith exception would not be applied. United States v. Granger, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190063 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 18, 2022):<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\u2026 In the context of drug crimes, “information goes stale very quickly ‘because drugs are usually sold and consumed in a prompt fashion.'” United States v. Brooks, 594 F.3d at 493 (quoting United States v. Frechette, 583 F.3d 374, 378 (6th Cir. 2009)). Again, there is no indication that Agent Kushel believed that ongoing criminal activity was occurring at the Santa Rosa address. There is no indication that a confidential informant engaged in, or knew of, drug transactions at the Santa Rosa address, or saw large quantities of drugs there. Instead, there is one vague phone call between Granger and Watkins about a “bag” in the backyard, which, even if this vague conversation did establish probable cause of drug activity at the Santa Rosa address, it lost its “freshness” by the time the search warrant was executed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A single telephone call 6 weeks before the search warrant was sought was stale. Nothing in between. \u201cIn the context of drug crimes, \u2018information goes stale very quickly \u201cbecause drugs are usually sold and consumed in a prompt fashion.\u201d\u2019\u201d And, … Continue reading