Defendant’s Franks challenges succeeds. Enough information was omitted from the affidavit for search warrant that the USMJ would not get a clear picture of what was really going on. And, it was material to the finding of probable cause. Motion to suppress granted. United States v. Anderson, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8082 (W.D. Va. Jan. 17, 2020):
Detective Bridges purportedly attempted to corroborate CI-2’s report by writing that he “conducted multiple controlled purchases from Harold Anderson” at the same address. To be sure, “[i]n cases in which the police similarly omitted one of these facts, courts have upheld the warrants despite the omission … when there were detailed statements by the informants, significant corroboration by the police, or other indicators regarding the informant’s reliability ….” Simmons, 771 F. Supp. 2d at 918; see also United States v. Wilhelm, 80 F.3d 116, 119 (4th Cir. 1996) (“[I]n evaluating whether an informant’s tip establishes probable cause, the degree to which the report is corroborated is an important consideration.”). However, statements of corroboration made in support of the search warrant application are insufficient where the affidavit contains “no affirmative allegation that the agent spoke with personal knowledge [or] any sources for the agent’s conclusion.” Gates, 462 U.S. at 276. Here, there is no indication in the affidavit of the sources of Detective Bridges’ corroborating statement. In fact, the affidavit suggests, misleadingly, that Detective Bridges himself identified Anderson as the seller. At the Franks hearing, however, Detective Bridges clarified that CI-1 conducted the first two controlled buys. After correcting the affidavit to include that information, and having found that the magistrate did not have sufficient information to evaluate CI-1’s credibility, the affidavit does not support a finding of probable cause.
Detective Bridges could have included facts regarding reliable sources for the corroborating information. For example, the government made much of audio and visual recordings from the first two controlled buys. Such information would support Detective Bridges’ assertion that Anderson was the seller during the earlier purchases. Like in Lull, however, the affidavit did not include any of that information, and the court cannot consider it now.
Ultimately, there is too much information missing from the affidavit for a magistrate to obtain a clear picture of the facts necessary for a probable cause determination. The story in the affidavit simply is not accurate, and while Detective Bridges’ testimony indicates that he could have corroborated the facts provided by CI-1 or CI-2, he failed to do so in his affidavit. Having removed from consideration the information provided exclusively by CI-1 and CI-2, the affidavit does not provide an adequate basis for identifying Anderson as the seller during the PC buy or prior controlled buys, negating probable cause. Detective Bridges may have been able to identify Anderson’s house based on his ongoing investigation, but he cannot confirm that Anderson was the seller in this instance so as to establish the likelihood that evidence of drug transactions remained in the home—a key link to the probable cause determination.
by John Wesley Hall
Criminal Defense Lawyer and
Search and seizure law consultant
Little Rock, Arkansas
Contact: forhall @ aol.com / The Book www.johnwesleyhall.com
"If it was easy, everybody would be doing it. It isn't, and they don't." —Me
"Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but of playing a poor hand well." –Josh Billings (pseudonym of Henry Wheeler Shaw), Josh Billings on Ice, and Other Things (1868) (erroneously attributed to Robert Louis Stevenson, among others)
“I am still learning.” —Domenico Giuntalodi (but misattributed to Michelangelo Buonarroti (common phrase throughout 1500's)).
"Love work; hate mastery over others; and avoid intimacy with the government."
—Shemaya, in the Thalmud
"It is a pleasant world we live in, sir, a very pleasant world. There are bad people in it, Mr. Richard, but if there were no bad people, there would be no good lawyers."
—Charles Dickens, “The Old Curiosity Shop ... With a Frontispiece. From a Painting by Geo. Cattermole, Etc.” 255 (1848)
"A system of law that not only makes certain conduct criminal, but also lays down rules for the conduct of the authorities, often becomes complex in its application to individual cases, and will from time to time produce imperfect results, especially if one's attention is confined to the particular case at bar. Some criminals do go free because of the necessity of keeping government and its servants in their place. That is one of the costs of having and enforcing a Bill of Rights. This country is built on the assumption that the cost is worth paying, and that in the long run we are all both freer and safer if the Constitution is strictly enforced."
—Williams
v. Nix, 700 F. 2d 1164, 1173 (8th Cir. 1983) (Richard Sheppard Arnold,
J.), rev'd Nix v. Williams, 467 US. 431 (1984).
"The criminal goes free, if he must, but it is the law that sets him free. Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws,
or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence." —Mapp
v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 659 (1961).
"Any costs the exclusionary rule are costs imposed directly by the Fourth Amendment."
—Yale Kamisar, 86 Mich.L.Rev. 1, 36 n. 151 (1987).
"There have been powerful hydraulic pressures throughout our history that
bear heavily on the Court to water down constitutional guarantees and give the
police the upper hand. That hydraulic pressure has probably never been greater
than it is today."
— Terry
v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 39 (1968) (Douglas, J., dissenting).
"The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their
property."
—Entick
v. Carrington, 19 How.St.Tr. 1029, 1066, 95 Eng. Rep. 807 (C.P. 1765)
"It is a fair summary of history to say that the safeguards of liberty have
frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people. And
so, while we are concerned here with a shabby defrauder, we must deal with his
case in the context of what are really the great themes expressed by the Fourth
Amendment."
—United
States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56, 69 (1950) (Frankfurter, J., dissenting)
"The course of true law pertaining to searches and seizures, as enunciated
here, has not–to put it mildly–run smooth."
—Chapman
v. United States, 365 U.S. 610, 618 (1961) (Frankfurter, J., concurring).
"A search is a search, even if it happens to disclose nothing but the
bottom of a turntable."
—Arizona
v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 325 (1987)
"For the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly
exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth
Amendment protection. ... But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in
an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected."
—Katz
v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967)
“Experience should teach us to be most on guard to
protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born
to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded
rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men
of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.”
—United
States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1925) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)
“Liberty—the freedom from unwarranted
intrusion by government—is as easily lost through insistent nibbles by
government officials who seek to do their jobs too well as by those whose purpose
it is to oppress; the piranha can be as deadly as the shark.”
—United
States v. $124,570, 873 F.2d 1240, 1246 (9th Cir. 1989)
"You can't always get what you want /
But if you try sometimes / You just might find / You get what you need."
—Mick Jagger & Keith Richards
"In Germany, they first came for the communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for
the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Catholic. Then they came
for me–and by that time there was nobody left to speak up."
—Martin Niemöller (1945) [he served seven years in a concentration
camp]
“You know, most men would get discouraged by
now. Fortunately for you, I am not most men!”
---Pepé Le Pew
"The point of the Fourth Amendment, which often is not grasped by zealous officers,
is not that it denies law enforcement the support of the usual inferences which
reasonable men draw from evidence. Its protection consists in requiring that
those inferences be drawn by a neutral and detached magistrate instead of being
judged by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting
out crime."
—Johnson
v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 13-14 (1948)