The affidavit averred that defendant came from his house and got in his car manifesting characteristics of somebody who was probably armed, although the officers could see no gun. This is all inference, which isn\u2019t precluded. The affidavit is not bare bones, and the good faith exception applies: \u201cThough the Court finds that the facts as stated in the Warrant are insufficient to establish probable cause, it does not find that the Warrant was based on an affidavit so lacking in indicia of probable cause as to render official belief in its existence entirely unreasonable. The Court holds that the officers executed the Warrant (up until and including the recovery of a firearm) in good faith.\u201d United States v. Smith, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6925 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 12, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This officer\u2019s seeing a meth pipe in plain view during a traffic stop was probable cause to search the interior of the car. United States v. Hays, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 868 (7th Cir. Jan. 12, 2024).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant\u2019s driving from home to the place of the controlled buy and back again was nexus. The controlled buy was probable cause. United States v. Phillips, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6853 (E.D. Tenn. Jan. 12, 2024).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The affidavit averred that defendant came from his house and got in his car manifesting characteristics of somebody who was probably armed, although the officers could see no gun. This is all inference, which isn\u2019t precluded. The affidavit is not … Continue reading