Mark Hoff v. State
07-15-00011-CR
Tex. App.Jan 31, 2017Background
- Mark Hoff was indicted for possession of <1 gram of methamphetamine in a drug-free zone; he moved to suppress evidence and statements obtained from a search of his home.
- A magistrate issued a warrant based on an affidavit by Narcotics Deputy Clint Andrews relying on a confidential informant (CS) who allegedly observed Hoff and others possessing methamphetamine within the past 48 hours.
- Andrews’s affidavit also stated Andrews and other narcotics officers had previously received information implicating Hoff and the residence, and that Andrews was familiar with Hoff from prior narcotics investigations and arrests.
- The trial court held a suppression hearing, denied the motion to suppress, and Hoff pled guilty and received a suspended seven-year sentence with ten years’ community supervision.
- On appeal Hoff argued the affidavit failed to establish probable cause because it relied on hearsay from an informant without sufficient indicia of reliability.
- The appellate court affirmed, concluding the affidavit provided a substantial basis for the magistrate to find probable cause when read in totality (including the informant’s recent first-hand tip plus officers’ independent corroborative information and the informant’s prior reliability).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of affidavit to establish probable cause for search warrant | Hoff: affidavit relied on a hearsay tip from an informant without adequate indicia of reliability or basis of knowledge, so no probable cause | State: affidavit contained informant’s recent first-hand observation, prior reliable use of the informant, and corroborating information from officers and Andrews’s personal familiarity with Hoff | Affidavit provided a substantial basis for probable cause under the totality of circumstances; suppression denial affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Guzman v. State, 955 S.W.2d 85 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (standard of review for suppression rulings: bifurcated review)
- State v. Duarte, 389 S.W.3d 349 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (informant-tip reliance and limits where tip is uncorroborated or first-time)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (U.S. 1983) (totality-of-the-circumstances test for informant tips; veracity and basis-of-knowledge considerations)
- Rodriguez v. State, 232 S.W.3d 55 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (review asks if magistrate had a substantial basis for concluding probable cause existed)
- State v. Dixon, 206 S.W.3d 587 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (appellate review will uphold suppression rulings if supported by record and correct under any applicable legal theory)
- Hegdal v. State, 488 S.W.2d 782 (Tex. Crim. App. 1973) (prior reliability of informant can support probable cause)
- Swearingen v. State, 143 S.W.3d 808 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (noting helpfulness of showing informant’s ability to recognize contraband but not always essential)