D.Minn.: Probable cause for evidence of tax evasion in the home where records would be

Probable cause for evidence of tax evasion in the home where records would be: “Here, the affidavit sought to establish probable cause to believe Mr. Erickson took part in an ongoing scheme to evade paying taxes. Toward that end, the affidavit establishes that Mr. Erickson exercised control over overseas businesses and routed revenue from those businesses to HBH’s United States bank account; that Mr. Erickson did not report all the deposits as income on HBH’s tax returns; and Mr. Erickson’s tax preparers relied on his representations about the nature of those payments as loans. The affidavit also establishes that the affiant corroborated the Informant’s statements related to Mr. Erickson’s tax scheme with emails, bank records, and interviews with Mr. Erickson’s tax preparers and bookkeepers, which show Mr. Erickson took part in the alleged scheme from 2013 until at least 2019. [¶] The fact that the affidavit describes non-criminal behavior does not warrant suppression because ‘[c]orroboration of minor, innocent details can suffice to establish probable cause.’ …” The good faith exception also applies. United States v. Erickson, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46606 (D. Minn. Mar. 14, 2025).*

Witness accounts provided probable cause for a tribal search warrant for evidence of sexual assault of a minor. United States v. Clark, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46599 (D. Minn. Mar. 14, 2025).*

There was probable cause based on informant hearsay here, and defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not making a losing suppression argument. People v. Berry, 2025 NY Slip Op 01523 (4th Dept. Mar. 14, 2025)* (the conviction was March 22, 2017, eight years ago).

This entry was posted in Informant hearsay, Nexus, Probable cause. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.