State v. Hidalgo, 296 Neb. 912

On July 10, 2015, Omaha police received an anonymous Crime Stoppers tip that a Hispanic male named “Roberto” (nickname “Sporty”), age ~30–35 and an active member of the 18th Street gang, lived at a specific Omaha address and possessed illegal firearms.
Officers surveilled the address, observed several tattooed Hispanic men on the porch who appeared alarmed, and noted a white Nissan Sentra registered to Robert Hidalgo and Jacqueline Linares in the driveway; utilities listed Linares at the address.
A trash pull from the residence produced mail addressed to that location and marijuana stems/seeds/leaves. Police identified Hidalgo (born 1987) as a known 18th Street gang member with nickname “Shorty.”
Based on the tip and the corroborating investigation, officers obtained a search warrant for the residence seeking marijuana and "weapons and ammunition used to conduct an illegal narcotics operation." The warrant was executed July 26, 2015.
Searches recovered marijuana and multiple firearms: one in the residence, one in a neighboring yard, and one from the Nissan Sentra in the driveway (Hidalgo later admitted the car gun was his). Hidalgo, a convicted felon, was charged with possession of a firearm by a prohibited person, convicted after a stipulated bench trial, and sentenced to 3–5 years.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Probable cause for search warrant	Warrant lacked probable cause because affidavit relied on an anonymous tip whose reliability was not sufficiently established; corroboration showed only "innocent details" and trash marijuana alone was insufficient	Affidavit included independent police corroboration (name/vehicle/occupants, gang membership, trash pull showing marijuana) supporting tip reliability and a fair probability of weapons/narcotics on premises	Court held affidavit established probable cause under totality of circumstances; corroboration compensated for anonymity and marijuana + tip supported the warrant
Scope of vehicle search	Search of the Nissan Sentra exceeded warrant because the vehicle was not explicitly listed in the warrant	Vehicle was parked in the driveway within the described premises, unobstructed and near the house; warrant language and affidavit anticipated weapons could be in vehicles on the property	Court held vehicle search valid as part of premises search; vehicles on described property may be searched when connected to the residence

State v. Hill, 288 Neb. 767 (Neb. 2014) (standard for review of search-warrant affidavits and probable-cause principles)
Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (U.S. 1983) (totality-of-the-circumstances test for informant tips and probable cause)
State v. Vermuele, 234 Neb. 973 (Neb. 1990) (no requirement that the crime itself be fully corroborated to justify probable cause)
State v. Lytle, 255 Neb. 738 (Neb. 1998) (officer’s independent investigation can establish informant reliability)
U.S. v. Evans, 92 F.3d 540 (7th Cir. 1996) (vehicles on premises described in warrants may be searched as part of the premises)
U.S. v. Pennington, 287 F.3d 739 (8th Cir. 2002) (search of vehicle connected to the described premises covered by warrant)
U.S. v. Briscoe, 317 F.3d 906 (8th Cir. 2003) (discussing sufficiency of evidence concerning illegal drug possession in warrant contexts)