\u201cBrennerman challenges the lawfulness of the search warrant of his Las Vegas apartment. Even assuming, for the sake of argument only, that the search warrant was unlawful, we conclude that the good faith exception to the Fourth Amendment’s exclusionary rule would apply. We therefore need not address the propriety of the search warrant. The district court found that the law enforcement agents who executed the warrant reasonably relied on its terms in good faith, and Brennerman has not challenged this finding.\u201d United States v. Brennerman, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 18415 (2d Cir. June 9, 2020).
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cDespite Defendant’s assertion that the affidavit for the search warrant is premised on unreliable information from the unnamed middleman, it is clear in reading the affidavit, and drawing reasonable inferences, that the affiant and magistrate relied on the information provided by a known CI who had a history of reliability with the ATF, aided by the independent corroboration of several ATF special agents during three controlled purchases. \u2026 These sources, in combination, support a finding that the affidavit was sufficient to establish probable cause irrespective of the presence of a middleman of narcotics.\u201d United States v. Fulton, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102236 (E.D. Mich. June 11, 2020).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cBrennerman challenges the lawfulness of the search warrant of his Las Vegas apartment. Even assuming, for the sake of argument only, that the search warrant was unlawful, we conclude that the good faith exception to the Fourth Amendment’s exclusionary rule … Continue reading