Category Archives: Informant hearsay

CA10: That officer could have provided false affidavit is not a ‘substantial preliminary showing’ for Franks

“Velarde-Pavia has offered no evidence that Officer Juarez lied in his affidavit. Rather than make the needed ‘substantial preliminary showing,’ Velarde-Pavia only speculates that Officer Juarez could be lying–that is not enough.” As to informant hearsay, the affidavit for the … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on CA10: That officer could have provided false affidavit is not a ‘substantial preliminary showing’ for Franks

CA2: Def’s possession of multiple cell phones and drugs packaged for street sale created inference more in hotel room

The search of defendant’s person produced multiple cell phones and drugs packaged for street-level sale. There was a fair probability there would be more in his hotel room since drug dealers usually have a base of operations. United States v. … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Informant hearsay, Probable cause | Comments Off on CA2: Def’s possession of multiple cell phones and drugs packaged for street sale created inference more in hotel room

D.Conn.: CI was personally involved in info he provided, and he was further corroborated by an unrelated wiretap

The CI here was untested for prior reliability, but the information was detailed and had the CI’s personal involvement. Moreover, an unrelated wiretap provided some corroboration of the CI’s involvement. This probable cause finding is not a close call. If … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on D.Conn.: CI was personally involved in info he provided, and he was further corroborated by an unrelated wiretap

E.D.Mich.: Officers’ versions of arrest and search show two valid versions of why it was valid

The two officers involved in defendant’s stop and search of his person and car had somewhat different versions of what happened. Under either, the search of his person and car were both reasonable. Defendant had no DL which was an … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Informant hearsay, Search incident, Waiver | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Officers’ versions of arrest and search show two valid versions of why it was valid

TN: Even if a viable motion to suppress existed, it was reasonable strategy to work a plea deal considering all the evidence of guilt

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not filing a suppression motion and working a plea deal instead. First, with the mountain of evidence against defendant, it was wise to work out a deal and avoid sentencing after trial for sexual assault … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Informant hearsay, Probable cause | Comments Off on TN: Even if a viable motion to suppress existed, it was reasonable strategy to work a plea deal considering all the evidence of guilt

CA1: “Face-to-face” contact with CI by another officer was sufficient

“Although we have said that ‘face-to-face contact between the agent and informant’ and an agent’s opportunity to personally question him generally provides indicia of that informant’s reliability, see, e.g., Dixon, 787 F.3d at 59; Greenburg, 410 F.3d at 67, the … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on CA1: “Face-to-face” contact with CI by another officer was sufficient

W.D.La.: Where the search was valid under the automobile exception, the officer’s subjective assessment is irrelevant

“Here, the facts known to Broussard at the time of the search—Dyson’s prior arrest for the illegal possession of a firearm and drugs, and the smell of marijuana emanating from the vehicle during the present stop—support a Terry pat-down search … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Reasonableness | Comments Off on W.D.La.: Where the search was valid under the automobile exception, the officer’s subjective assessment is irrelevant

CA11: Failure to seek review of R&R is waiver

Defendant did not seek review of the R&R by the USDJ, so appellate review was waived. Also, plain error review not sought. United States v. Fisher, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 37847 (11th Cir. Dec. 21, 2021). Citizen complaint from the … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Standards of review | Comments Off on CA11: Failure to seek review of R&R is waiver

W.D.La.: In a § 1983 suit over a SW, informer privilege prevents disclosure here

In a § 1983 suit over a search warrant, the defendants plead informer privilege to prevent disclosure of the CI that led to the search. Denied. Informant privilege stronger in civil cases than criminal. There was also significant other information … Continue reading

Posted in Franks doctrine, Ineffective assistance, Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on W.D.La.: In a § 1983 suit over a SW, informer privilege prevents disclosure here

D.D.C.: CI’s single controlled buy off def was PC

A single controlled buy from defendant’s home is probable cause without additional corroboration. Moreover, the CI had worked for MPD for a decade. United States v. Hill, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 238824 (D.D.C. Dec. 14, 2021). The fire department responded … Continue reading

Posted in Administrative search, Informant hearsay, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on D.D.C.: CI’s single controlled buy off def was PC

CA6: Officer routinely asking “about drugs, weapons, and dead bodies” during traffic stops doesn’t unreasonably extend them

Officer “Mathieson testified that it is his habit to ask about drugs, weapons, and dead bodies during traffic stops. In any event, police officers are permitted to stop a vehicle for a traffic violation and look for evidence of a … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on CA6: Officer routinely asking “about drugs, weapons, and dead bodies” during traffic stops doesn’t unreasonably extend them

CA9: That CI could be accountable for falsity supports veracity

“Considering the totality of circumstances, the search warrant affidavit established probable cause that evidence or contraband would be found at Conard’s residence. The affidavit supplied sufficient indicia that the first confidential informant (‘CI 1′) was reliable. To begin, CI 1 … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on CA9: That CI could be accountable for falsity supports veracity

OH2: Citizen informant provided RS

Officers received a disorderly conduct call at a fitness center. When officers arrived, defendant was pointed out, and the officers detained him. They hadn’t seen anything illegal at that point, but the employee’s call as a citizen informant was enough … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on OH2: Citizen informant provided RS

TX10: Not challenging search when lack of knowledge was the issue for trial is reasonable strategy

In this post-conviction case, trial defense counsel wasn’t asked and didn’t provide an affidavit why he said “no objection” to admission of allegedly illegally seized evidence at trial. Without knowing why, it can’t be ineffective (it was argued it was … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on TX10: Not challenging search when lack of knowledge was the issue for trial is reasonable strategy

S.D.N.Y.: Press motion for disclosure of SW affidavit denied because investigation ongoing

“The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (‘RCFP’), claiming rights of access grounded in the common law, asks the Court to unseal documents relating to a search warrant dated November 5, 2021 (the ‘Search Warrant’), which was executed at … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Warrant papers | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: Press motion for disclosure of SW affidavit denied because investigation ongoing

LA5: Two CIs provided RS for def’s vehicle stop without need for traffic offense

The trial court’s denial of suppress is affirmed. There were two CIs. One provided details about defendant’s drug operation and the places and vehicles involved. The other provided predictive information that panned out. By the time defendant’s vehicle was stopped, … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Informant hearsay, Plain view, feel, smell | Comments Off on LA5: Two CIs provided RS for def’s vehicle stop without need for traffic offense

CA6: Failure to object to co-occupant’s apparent consent supported consent

An occupant of defendant’s house with apparent authority consented to an entry. When the officers expressed an interest in defendant’s cell phone, he didn’t voice any concerns. “He maintains that the male occupant’s invitation to the officers to enter Mason’s … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Informant hearsay, Probable cause | Comments Off on CA6: Failure to object to co-occupant’s apparent consent supported consent

OH4: Failure to corroborate CI was a complete failure of PC, so no GFE either

The affidavit for search warrant here failed to show probable cause at all. It relied on informant hearsay from an identified informant. The trial court erroneously concluded that an identified informant didn’t have to be corroborated. In addition, probable cause … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Informant hearsay, Probable cause | Comments Off on OH4: Failure to corroborate CI was a complete failure of PC, so no GFE either

NY4: Failure to ID source of information in affidavit for SW failed showing PC

“Here, the majority of the information provided in support of the warrant application was in an affidavit prepared by a detective, and that affidavit ‘does not “permit a reasonable inference that it was based upon [the detective]’s personal knowledge”’ .… … Continue reading

Posted in Collective knowledge, Informant hearsay, Probable cause, Standing | Comments Off on NY4: Failure to ID source of information in affidavit for SW failed showing PC

W.D.Tex.: Stone bar applies whether 4A challenge made or not; could it have been?

“The Stone bar applies to ‘to all claims arising under the Fourth Amendment,’ including challenges to the seizure of evidence, Hughes v. Dretke, 412 F.3d 582, 596 (5th Cir. 2005) and even to claims ‘where the petitioner did not avail … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on W.D.Tex.: Stone bar applies whether 4A challenge made or not; could it have been?