Summary
The Supreme Court of Oregon reviewed whether an affidavit, after excision of information derived from an unlawful initial search, established probable cause for a search warrant. The court held that appellate review of the affidavit's sufficiency is a legal question and that no deference to the trial court's probable-cause determination was appropriate. It concluded that the remaining facts and reasonable inferences supported probable cause and reversed the Court of Appeals and circuit court.
Holdings
- The sufficiency of a search-warrant affidavit is a legal question. After information is excised from the affidavit, an appellate court independently evaluates whether the remaining allegations and reasonable inferences could permit the issuing magistrate to find probable cause; it does not defer to the trial court's factual findings or inferences concerning affidavit sufficiency.
- The affidavit, after excision of information derived from the unlawful initial search, nevertheless established probable cause to search defendants' home for an unlawful amount of marijuana.
- The trial court erred by independently rejecting the informant's statements as unreliable; the affidavit contained circumstances from which the issuing magistrate reasonably could infer that the informant was truthful and had a basis for the information.
Questions Presented
- Whether the sufficiency of the search-warrant affidavit, after excision of information obtained during an unlawful initial search, is reviewed as a legal question independently by each reviewing court or deferentially to the trial court's factual findings and inferences.
- Whether the remaining allegations in the affidavit, including the informant's statements and reasonable inferences from them, established probable cause to believe that an unlawful amount of usable marijuana would be found in defendants' home.
- Whether the trial court properly discounted the informant's statements when assessing whether the affidavit established probable cause.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (14)
- State v. Castilleja, 215 Or. App. 235, 168 P.3d 1177 (2007)(reversed)
- State v. Goodman, 328 Or. 318, 325-26, 975 P.2d 458 (1999)(followed)
- State v. Anspach, 298 Or. 375, 380-81, 692 P.2d 602 (1984)(followed)
- State v. Villagran, 294 Or. 404, 408-12, 657 P.2d 1223 (1983)(followed)
- State v. Montigue, 288 Or. 359, 605 P.2d 656 (1980)(followed)
- United States v. Harris, 403 U.S. 573, 91 S. Ct. 2075, 29 L. Ed. 2d 723 (1971)(followed)
- State v. Johnson, 335 Or. 511, 523, 73 P.3d 282 (2003)(followed)
- Ball v. Gladden, 250 Or. 485, 487, 443 P.2d 621 (1968)(followed)
- State v. Harp, 299 Or. 1, 9, 697 P.2d 548 (1985)(followed)
- State v. Esplin, 314 Or. 296, 304-05, 839 P.2d 211 (1992)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 14.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…