An affidavit’s sufficiency is determined based on its actual contents, not what it allegedly lacks or could have been added, citing United States v. Allen, 211 F.3d 970, 975 (6th Cir. 2000) (en banc)). This is a forgiving standard. Here, there was sufficient corroboration of the CI to give probable cause. United States v. Ben, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61200 (W.D.Ky. May 11, 2015).<\/p>\n
A person with apparent authority consented to a search during a knock-and-talk, and defendant\u2019s consent wasn\u2019t required. United States v. Thompson, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61201 (W.D.Tenn. May 11, 2015), R&R United States v. Thompson, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62111 (W.D.Tenn. April 21, 2015).*<\/p>\n
Parole officers had reasonable suspicion defendant had a gun in his apartment to justify a parole search. There was no factual basis to believe there were explosives, but discarding that from the equation still left enough. United States v. Vang, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61099 (E.D. Pa. May 8, 2015).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
An affidavit’s sufficiency is determined based on its actual contents, not what it allegedly lacks or could have been added, citing United States v. Allen, 211 F.3d 970, 975 (6th Cir. 2000) (en banc)). This is a forgiving standard. Here, … Continue reading