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”’ .… Additionally, with respect to the parts of the warrant application that were based on hearsay information, the application failed to meet the Aguilar-Spinelli test with respect to the sources of that information. Although the detective indicated that he obtained some of that hearsay information from other officers, he did not name the officers and they did not provide affidavits or any basis for their knowledge, thus that information was not sufficiently reliable …. Other hearsay information was purportedly received from two confidential informants, but it is well settled that, ‘once an appropriate challenge by the defense has been raised, the People are required to produce the police informant for an in camera inquiry unless they can demonstrate that the informant is unavailable and cannot be produced through the exercise of due diligence’ ….” The CIs didn’t show for the hearing. People v. Pitcher, 2021 NY Slip Op 06526, 2021 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6514 (4th Dept. Nov. 19, 2021).

The government resisted providing the search warrant materials because the CI would be disclosed prematurely. Defendant’s counsel’s affidavit only that defendant was present at the time of the search doesn’t show standing. Denied. United States v. Arrington, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 223296 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 18, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Collective knowledge, Informant hearsay, Probable cause, Standing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.