LA4: Def’s entering and leaving a drug house wasn’t RS on its own

“Turning to the facts of this case, we also find the officer’s observation of defendant entering and exiting a residence that was reasonably suspected as being used for narcotics transactions to be insufficient to support a reasonable suspicion of participation in criminal activity.” Defendant’s patdown then was unreasonable. State v. Collins, 2019 La. App. LEXIS 2180 (La. App. 4 Cir. Dec. 4, 2019).

“Defendants contend that the Olsen Affidavit fails to establish probable cause to search the warehouse at 843 Main Street. Specifically, they argue that the Olsen Affidavit relies too heavily on statements made by CS1 and Employee 1, neither of whom is a credible source. Because other information in the affidavit independently corroborates each source’s statements, the Court rejects this argument.” Moreover, there was plenty of evidence of a marijuana grow operation and money laundering. United States v. Laverty, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 210456 (D. Mass. Dec. 5, 2019).*