Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

defendanttrialaffidavitmotionwilladmissibility
defendanttrialaffidavitmotionwill

Related Cases

St. John v. United States, 227 A.3d 141
View Case »
Fred R. Esser, P.C. v. U.S., 750 F.Supp. 421, Unempl.Ins.Rep. (CCH) P 15840A
View Case »
Citron v. C. I. R., 97 T.C. No. 12, 97 T.C. 200, Tax Ct. Rep. (CCH) 47,513, Tax Ct. Rep. Dec. (P-H) 97.12
View Case »
Emershaw v. C. I. R., T.C. Memo. 1990-246, 1990 WL 65997, 59 T.C.M. (CCH) 621, T.C.M. (P-H) P 90,246, 1990 PH TC Memo 90,246
View Case »
Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Duberstein, 362 U.S. 907, 80 S.Ct. 660 (Mem)
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

United States v. Fishback, Slip Copy, 2024 WL 2221441

Facts

Defendant Eugene Fishback challenged the admissibility of evidence seized during two searches, arguing that the affidavit supporting the search warrant lacked probable cause. The searches were conducted at two locations, with the warrant for one location being authorized by a magistrate judge. Fishback contended that the affidavit relied heavily on outdated information from a confidential informant and failed to establish that drug activities were occurring at his residence.

The items Fishback wishes to have suppressed were seized in two searches executed at 3305 Morhan Way and 175 N. Locust Hill Drive, Apartment #1704.

Issue

Did the affidavit supporting the search warrant contain sufficient probable cause to justify the searches conducted at Fishback's residence?

Fishback argues that the affidavit supporting the warrants lacked the requisite probable cause.

Rule

An issuing judge's finding of probable cause is given great deference and is not set aside unless arbitrarily reached. To establish probable cause, an affidavit must show a likelihood that the items sought are connected with criminal activity and that they will be found in the place to be searched.

An issuing judge's finding of probable cause in support of a warrant is afforded great deference. It is not set aside unless the finding was arbitrarily reached.

Analysis

The court reviewed the affidavit in its entirety and found that it established probable cause through corroborated information and observations by law enforcement officers, rather than solely relying on the confidential informant's statements. The court concluded that there was more than a fair probability that drug contraband would be found at the specified location.

Upon reviewing the affidavit in its entirety, the undersigned agrees with Magistrate Judge Stinnett's finding of probable cause. Despite Fishback's contention to the contrary, the confidential informant's reported statements from 2021 do not constitute 'one of the major items' supporting the existence of probable cause.

Conclusion

The court denied Fishback's motion to suppress the evidence seized at 175 N. Locust Hill Drive, Apartment #1704, and granted his unopposed motion to exclude Hawkins' statements.

Accordingly, Fishburn's motion to suppress the evidence seized at that location will be denied.

Who won?

The United States prevailed in the case as the court upheld the search warrant's validity and allowed the evidence obtained to be used at trial.

The United States may then use that to show that Hawkins 'had dominion, control, and ownership of the contraband.'

You must be