Arranged and completed drug deal was probable cause for issuance of a search warrant for defendant\u2019s house because it was a logical inference that he would keep the drugs there. United States v. Savoy, 883 F. Supp. 2d 101 (D. D.C. 2012)*:<\/p>\n
Based on a totality of the circumstances, the magistrate’s approval of a search warrant for Hudson’s home was reasonable. The affidavit supporting the warrant application was based on a combination of factors, including information from two cooperating witnesses previously determined reliable by the FBI, interpretations of coded conversations by SA Ray, the prior narcotics involvement of both men, two unexplained meetings between Hudson and Savoy in parking lots, and the seizure of five bags of cocaine from Hudson shortly after he had discussed meeting with Savoy to get “five.” These were sufficient to support a finding of probable cause that Hudson was engaged in narcotics trafficking with Savoy.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, D.C. Circuit precedent supports the inference that evidence of narcotics trafficking would be found in Hudson’s home, despite the fact that most evidence of it was derived from activity that may have taken place elsewhere. See United States v. Johnson, 437 F.3d 69, 71-72, 369 U.S. App. D.C. 321 (D.C. Cir. 2006); Spencer, 530 F.3d at 1007 (“Common experience suggests that drug dealers must mix and measure the merchandise, protect it from competitors, and conceal evidence of their trade … in secure locations. For the vast majority … the most convenient location to secure items is the home.”).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading