SUSAN E. FELLOWS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
This appeal concerns whether a search warrant's supporting affidavit established sufficient basis for the reliability of a confidential informant. The court reversed the denial of the motion to suppress, holding that bare allegations that an informant had previously provided reliable information without specific facts or independent corroboration are insufficient to establish probable cause.
The court held that an affidavit must set forth facts demonstrating either that the affiant had personal knowledge of the confidential informant's reliability or facts corroborating the informant's reliability from an independent source. Bare allegations of past reliability without such facts or corroboration are insufficient, and the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule does not apply.
[1] An affidavit supporting a search warrant must demonstrate a sufficient basis to establish the reliability of a confidential informant.
[2] Probable cause for a search warrant requires consideration of the veracity and basis of knowledge of those supplying hearsay information.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“an affidavit must set forth facts from which the magistrate could find the affiant had personal knowledge of the confidential informant's reliability or facts which corroborate the reliability of the confidential informant from an independent source.”
The court's standard for what must be included in a search warrant affidavit regarding confidential informant reliability.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSusan E. Fellows was charged with two counts of possession of cocaine, one count of possession of LSD, and one count of possession of drug paraphernal…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Possession Of Lsd cases and more on FLexlaw
BLUE, Judge.
This appeal is from a plea of no contest to two counts of possession of cocaine, one count of possession of LSD, and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia, in which Susan E. Fellows (Fellows) specifically reserved her right to appeal the denial of her motion to suppress evidence. Fellows argues the affidavit in support of the search warrant did not on its face demonstrate a sufficient basis to establish the reliability of the confidential informant. We agree with this contention and reverse.
The affidavit for the search warrant contained this information: “Your affiant offers the following to show the trustworthiness and reliability of said confidential informant: 1. Said confidential informant has assisted the Hillsborough County Sheriffs Office on investigations in the past and information provided during the investigations was found to be reliable and trustworthy. 2. Said confidential informant is a past user of cocaine and can recognize cocaine in its various forms.” The confidential informant was further identified by a confidential informant number issued by the Hillsborough County Sheriffs Office.
The court had to find that given all the circumstances, including consideration of the veracity and basis of knowledge of those supplying hearsay information, probable cause existed to support issuance of the warrant. See Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 103 S.Ct. 2317, 76 L.Ed.2d 527 (1983). The state argues that the trial court properly relied on State v. Macolino, 583 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), in denying the motion to suppress. However, the instant case is distinguishable from Macoli-no, in that the affiant in Macolino had personal knowledge of the confidential informant’s reliability. At most, the statements in the affidavit in this case indicate someone other than the affiant considered the confidential informant to be reliable, but there was no corroboration of reliability from an independent source. St. Angelo v. State, 532 So. 2d 1346 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988).
This court in Brown v. State, 561 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), held an allegation that the confidential informant had previously provided reliable information to the Tampa Police Department was insufficient to establish the informant’s reliability. Although the affidavit in the instant case stated the informant had previously provided reliable information to the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s office, it did not set forth any additional facts concerning reliability. We conclude an affidavit must set forth facts from which the magistrate could find the affiant had personal knowledge of the confidential informant’s reliability or facts which corroborate the reliability of the confidential informant from an independent source.
In following St. Angelo and Brown, we hold the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule announced in United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 104 S.Ct. 3405, 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984), is inapplicable. We reverse the order denying motion to suppress and remand for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded.
THREADGILL, A.C.J., and PARKER, J„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Peterson, 739 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 1999)…1337, 1339 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Smith v. State, 637 So. 2d 351, 352-353 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); and St. Angelo v. State, 532 So. 2d 1346, 1347 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)). See also Boyle v. State, 669 So. 2d 330, 331-32 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Fellows v. State, 612 So. 2d 686, 687 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). Officer NeSmith stated in his affidavit that the informant “has provided information to law enforcement on at least twenty occasions regarding illegal criminal activities occurring in Escambia County, Florida that has prove…
-
Smith v. State, 637 So. 2d 351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…ation, there is a fair probability contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place. Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 238, 103 S.Ct. 2317, 2332, 76 L.Ed.2d 527, 548 (1983) (e.s.). Appellant points out that, in Fellows v. State, 612 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993), as here, the affidavit generally alleged the informant’s previous reliability. The court reversed the denial of a motion to suppress, in that the affidavit did not set forth facts from which the magistrate could find that the aff…1 / 2
-
State v. Reyes, 650 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…et forth facts from which the magistrate could find the affiant had personal knowledge of the confidential informant’s reliability or facts which corroborate the reliability of the confidential informant from an independent source. Fellows v. State, 612 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). The affidavit in the instant case did not indicate that the affiant had personal knowledge of the reliability of the informant and although the informant may have previously given reliable information to the sheriffs office, ther…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Illinois v. Gates et ux., 462 U.S. 213 (U.S. 1983)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (U.S. 1984)
- Sonny E. Brown v. State, 561 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
- ST. Angelo v. State, 532 So. 2d 1346 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
- State v. MacOlino, 583 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)