There was probable cause for issuance of the search warrant for defendant\u2019s house. The possibility of another explanation doesn\u2019t mean there isn\u2019t probable cause. \u201cThe defendant argues that the facts are equally consistent with the possibility that the narcotics were stored not at Tucker’s home but somewhere else and that Tucker had taken small amounts to his home\u2014or kept them in his car\u2014in each instance. But whether there might be an alternative explanation for the facts alleged is not the standard.\u201d United States v. Tucker, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89787 (W.D. N.Y. May 29, 2019).<\/p>\n
\u201cThe passage of 12 days between the robbery and the date of the supporting affidavit is \u2018not such a long period that it is likely that [Hughes] would have disposed of the gun,\u2019 clothes, or other evidence sought in the warrant.\u201d United States v. Hughes, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88388 (E.D. Pa. May 23, 2019).* The gun and clothes are likely to be kept and still be there, even if proceeds of the robbery are not.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
There was probable cause for issuance of the search warrant for defendant\u2019s house. The possibility of another explanation doesn\u2019t mean there isn\u2019t probable cause. \u201cThe defendant argues that the facts are equally consistent with the possibility that the narcotics were … Continue reading