There was no probable cause for the search of defendant\u2019s house for evidence of a nearly two-year-old murder. Even if what was sought was there, it was highly unlikely it would prove anything. Finally, the probable cause was so lacking the good faith exception does not apply. United States v. Lopes, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 247927 (D.Mass. Dec. 30, 2021):<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
[O]n December 11, 2019, Boston Police Detective Brian Ball sought a warrant to search Lopes’s residence for his iPhone 7 cellular telephone, and any documents related to the control and custody of the now-scrapped BMW. \u2026 In his affidavit, Ball opined that a search of Lopes’s property and person would likely result in \u2018the recovery of important evidence\u2019 related to Lopes’s role in the December 31, 2017, shooting. \u2026 The search warrant was issued by an assistant clerk-magistrate on December 13, 2019, and executed on December 16, 2019. \u2026 During the search of Lopes’s home, police recovered firearms and ammunition, fentanyl, marijuana, $3,285 in cash, license plates, and a box for an iPhone 7 Plus. \u2026<\/p>
On its face, Detective Ball’s affidavit fails to establish probable cause either that Lopes was involved in the December 31, 2017, shooting, or if he had been, that evidence of his involvement would be found in his home some two years after the fact. The prime justification for suspecting Lopes \u2014 namely, that the shooter came to the scene in a red BMW and that Lopes then had access to a red BMW \u2014 is not sufficient to demonstrate a fair probability that Lopes was either the shooter or an accomplice.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
There was no probable cause for the search of defendant\u2019s house for evidence of a nearly two-year-old murder. Even if what was sought was there, it was highly unlikely it would prove anything. Finally, the probable cause was so lacking … Continue reading