State of Tennessee v. Marcia Latrice Taylor
M2016-00934-CCA-R3-CD
| Tenn. Crim. App. | Feb 15, 2017Background
- Maury County charged Marcia Latrice Taylor with possession with intent to sell cocaine and marijuana after police executed a search warrant on her business, the Dirty Dirty Lounge.
- Affidavit for the warrant relied primarily on a confidential informant (CI) who reported he could buy cocaine at the lounge and described three controlled buys conducted under police supervision.
- For each buy: CI and vehicle were searched, CI was wired and given buy money, officers observed CI enter/exit the lounge, CI returned with a clear baggie of cocaine that field-tested positive.
- Affidavit identified Taylor as behind the bar and described the CI’s claim that Taylor reached under the bar to retrieve the drugs; officers corroborated Taylor’s connection to the lounge via a rental/beer permit listing.
- Trial court granted Taylor’s motion to suppress, finding the affidavit failed Aguilar-Spinelli’s basis-of-knowledge and veracity requirements for a criminal informant.
- Court of Criminal Appeals reversed: held the three controlled buys and surrounding procedures sufficiently corroborated the CI’s reliability as to the premises and supported probable cause for the search warrant; indictment reinstated.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Taylor) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether affidavit relying on a criminal CI established probable cause for a search warrant | Controlled buys plus corroboration (ownership records, observation of CI entering/exiting, searches, field tests) cure any informant deficiencies and establish probable cause | Affidavit failed Aguilar-Spinelli: no basis of knowledge shown for CI and CI’s credibility is undermined by cocaine residue found in CI’s car | Court: Reversed suppression — controlled buys and corroboration established CI’s reliability as to the premises and supported probable cause |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jacumin, 778 S.W.2d 430 (Tenn. 1989) (adopted Aguilar-Spinelli two‑pronged test for informant affidavits)
- State v. Powell, 53 S.W.3d 258 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2000) (controlled purchases can corroborate informant information supporting a warrant)
- State v. Moon, 841 S.W.2d 336 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1992) (explains basis‑of‑knowledge and veracity prongs and reliability on a particular occasion)
- State v. Meeks, 876 S.W.2d 121 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1993) (standard of review—deference to magistrate’s probable cause determination)