Com. v. Palestini, R., 297 EDA 2017

On Sept. 15, 2015 police obtained an anticipatory search warrant for 2502 S. 10th St., Philadelphia, to search for methadone, oxycodone, and xanax; execution occurred Sept. 17, 2015.
Execution yielded 599 methadone, 302 oxycodone, 70 lorazepam pills and $17,000; Palestini was arrested and charged with possession with intent to deliver.
Affidavit: an OAG narcotics agent relied on a confidential source (C/S) who, on three dates, reported that Rosemary DiVincenzo would pick up large pill shipments at pharmacies and deliver them to Palestini.
Investigators independently surveilled two earlier occasions (July and August 2015): they observed DiVincenzo leave pharmacies with large white bags of pill bottles, drive to Palestini’s residence, enter with the bag and leave without it; officers observed Palestini conducting apparent hand-to-hand drug transactions.
Affidavit’s anticipatory warrant included a triggering condition: it would only be executed if DiVincenzo obtained prescription drugs that day, immediately drove to and entered the residence with a bag of pills and exited without the bag.
Trial court granted suppression of the physical evidence; Superior Court reversed, holding the officers’ corroboration of the C/S provided sufficient probable cause for the anticipatory warrant.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Commonwealth)	Defendant's Argument (Palestini)	Held
Whether the anticipatory warrant was supported by probable cause	Corroboration by experienced affiant and surveillance of prior deliveries to the residence provided probable cause despite limited C/S reliability detail	Affidavit relied on an unreliable, uncorroborated C/S and mere observation of lawful pharmacy transactions couldn’t support inference of illegal distribution	Reversed suppression: totality of circumstances (C/S tips + police corroboration + observed pattern + triggering condition) furnished probable cause
Whether reviewing court must defer to magistrate’s probable-cause determination	Magistrate had substantial basis given corroborated details; deference appropriate	Trial court improperly discounted corroboration and treated lawful conduct as necessarily innocent only	Court applied Gates totality-of-the-circumstances and found magistrate had substantial basis

Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (establishing totality-of-the-circumstances test for informant tips)
United States v. Grubbs, 547 U.S. 90 (defining anticipatory warrants and triggering conditions)
Commonwealth v. Gray, 503 A.2d 921 (Pa. 1985) (adopting Gates under PA Constitution)
Commonwealth v. Sanchez, 907 A.2d 477 (Pa. 2006) (police corroboration of informant details can satisfy Gates)
Commonwealth v. Wallace, 42 A.3d 1040 (Pa. 2012) (probable cause is commonsense, practical inquiry)
Commonwealth v. Coleman, 830 A.2d 554 (Pa. 2003) (reviewing court ensures magistrate had substantial basis for probable cause)