IL: Circumstances made SW affidavit admissible at trial

The trial court abused its discretion in not permitting the defense to use the search warrant affidavit at trial that showed the warrant was targeting another person for other things other than what was found. The court cautions this may be unique to undercut the dissent, but then it may not be. People v. Hudson, 2023 IL App (1st) 192519, 2023 Ill. App. LEXIS 20 (Jan. 30, 2023). [When the facts justifying the search at trial contradict the affidavit for warrant, that can be fair game on officer credibility, depending on the case, of course.]

The officer here was not obliged to seek out exculpatory information for charging, but she was obliged to consider it if it was learned. At any rate, qualified immunity applies. Stark v. City of N.Y., 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 2308 (2d Cir. Jan. 30, 2023).*

The stop was justified by reasonable suspicion from a CI. “Here, the tip was not anonymous, but from a known source. And the source’s account was largely corroborated. That’s enough, we’ve said, for reasonable suspicion.” Once the officer got to the car, he could smell marijuana. United States v. Howard, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 2342 (11th Cir. Jan. 30, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Admissibility of evidence, Franks doctrine, Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.