Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

10-1022 U.S. v. McDuffy

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//April 7, 2011//

10-1022 U.S. v. McDuffy

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//April 7, 2011//

Listen to this article

Search and Seizure
Franks motions

Even if the officer’s affidavit would have clarified that only one flake of marijuana was found in the defendant’s trash, the affidavit would still support probable cause for a search warrant.

“McDuffy’s argument fails on the materiality prong of the Franks test, even if we assume for purposes of argument that Officer Connelly’s omission of the amount of marijuana he found in the trash was a deliberate choice. Even a very small quantity of marijuana in the trash provided sufficient reinforcement of the other information in the affidavit indicating a reasonable likelihood that McDuffy was dealing drugs from his home. Each individual detail in the affidavit would not have been sufficient by itself to support a finding of probable cause, but the details were mutually reinforcing. The whole was greater than the sum of the individual details. See United States v. Olson, 408 F.3d 366, 372 (7th Cir. 2005) (affirming denial of motion to suppress; individual details were not sufficient for probable cause but together supported issuance of search warrant); see also Aljabari, 626 F.3d at 944 (relying on totality of circumstances to support search warrant).”

“The currency handoff on McDuffy’s lawn, followed the next day by the arrival of seven men who each stayed for five minutes or less, was suspicious in and of itself, and even more so in light of the marijuana the police found in his trash. The transactions observed by the informant increased the likelihood that McDuffy was directly involved with any drugs found in his trash, and that he was handling larger quantities. McDuffy’s many prior drug convictions cast doubt on any innocent explanations for the marijuana flake, the currency handoff, and the stream of visitors to his home. See United States v. Smith, 581 F.3d 692, 694 (8th Cir. 2009) (interpreting evidence from suspect’s trash in light of prior conviction).”

Affirmed.

10-1022 U.S. v. McDuffy

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois, McDade, J., Hamilton, J.

Full Text

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests