By: Derek Hawkins//October 20, 2015//
Criminal
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Officials: FLAUM, RIPPLE, and SYKES, Circuit Judges.
Affidavit for Search Warrant – Motion to Suppress
No. 14-3626
United States of America v. Kenneth Mullins
Factual inaccuracies in warrant affidavit were immaterial to probable cause determination, therefore motion to suppress denied.
“On these facts, all of which members of the Winnebago County Sheriff’s department averred to have witnessed, there was a fair probability that drugs would be found in Mullins’s apartment. See United States v. Orozco, 576 F.3d 745, 749 (7th Cir. 2009) (discussing the showing needed to establish probable cause to search a drug dealer’s home). Any additional details are superfluous and immaterial to the finding of probable cause, including whether Deputy Boomer maintained surveillance of the CI throughout the controlled buy, whether the CI spoke directly to T or to an intermediary on the phone to set up the drug buy, and whether Deputy Boomer relied on police reports. Even if Deputy Boomer had not maintained surveillance of the CI throughout the entirety of the controlled buy, this detail is not necessary for a finding of probable cause. With three officers—Deputies Boomer, Kaiser, and Jurasek—conducting the controlled buy, it is reasonable that among them they were able to observe both the CI and T at the necessary times to establish probable cause. As the district court noted, there is no indication that the third party intermediary on the phone was the source of any information in the affidavit except for the location of the controlled buy, and that information was corroborated when the officers observed the hand-to-hand transaction at the Family Dollar.”
Affirmed.