State v. Bray, 297 Neb. 916

Officers obtained a warrant to search common areas and a roommate Gonsalves’ bedroom based on informant Deven Moore’s tip; affidavit omitted that Moore was in custody and intoxicated when he gave the tip.
District court found the omission reckless and that the affidavit, if supplemented, would not establish probable cause; the warrant to search common areas was therefore invalid.
During execution, officers observed through an open doorway a bong, grinder, and the odor of marijuana in Bray’s bedroom; they escorted Bray into his room to retrieve a charger and observed paraphernalia.
After the common-area search concluded, officer Bures spoke privately with Bray on the porch, told him what was observed, and asked for consent to search Bray’s room; Bray asked to call counsel, consulted by cell phone, then signed a written consent form after being advised of the right to refuse.
The search pursuant to Bray’s consent uncovered additional contraband and cash; Bray moved to suppress all evidence as fruit of the invalid warrant but the court denied the motion, convicted Bray, and he appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Validity of the warrant (Franks challenge)	Bray: affidavit omitted that informant was in custody, so affidavit false and warrant unsupported	State: relied on warrant and officer good-faith; but county acknowledged omission	Court: omission was reckless; warrant invalid for lack of probable cause
Admissibility of evidence obtained after consent	Bray: consent was tainted by the prior illegal search and not voluntary or sufficiently attenuated	State: consent was voluntary and attenuated—Bray consulted counsel, was advised of right to refuse, and signed written consent	Court: consent was voluntary and sufficiently attenuated; evidence admissible

Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (establishes standards for challenging affidavits based on false statements or omissions)
Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590 (sets factors for attenuation and admissibility of consent after constitutional violations)
Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine)
Elkins v. United States, 364 U.S. 206 (exclusionary rule principles)
U.S. v. Greer, 607 F.3d 559 (8th Cir. 2010) (consent attenuated by consultation and advisement despite proximity)
State v. Lammers, 267 Neb. 679 (Nebraska standards for informant reliability in affidavits)
State v. King, 207 Neb. 270 (discusses citizen informant/self-corroboration limits)
State v. Gorup, 279 Neb. 841 (Nebraska discussion of attenuation and Fourth Amendment analysis)