State v. Hidalgo, 296 Neb. 912

On July 10, 2015, Omaha police received an anonymous Crime Stoppers tip that a Hispanic male “Roberto” (nickname “Sporty”), an 18th Street gang member aged ~30–35, was a felon in possession of illegal firearms and lived at a specific Omaha residence.
Officers surveilled the address, observed several tattooed Hispanic males on the porch who appeared alarmed, noted a white Nissan Sentra registered to Robert Hidalgo and Jacqueline Linares, and verified Linares as the utility account holder.
A trash pull from the residence produced mail to the address and marijuana stems/leaves/seeds.
Based on the tip and the investigative corroboration, officers obtained a warrant authorizing a search for marijuana and "all monies, records, weapons and ammunition used to conduct an illegal narcotics operation."
Execution of the warrant recovered firearms in the house, another firearm in a neighboring yard, and a firearm in the Nissan Sentra; Hidalgo later admitted the weapon in the car was his.
Hidalgo (a prior felony-level conviction) was convicted after a stipulated bench trial for possession of a firearm by a prohibited person; he appealed claiming (1) lack of probable cause for the warrant and (2) an invalid vehicle search.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Hidalgo)	Held
Probable cause for the search warrant	The anonymous tip plus officer corroboration (name similarity, vehicle registration, utility records, gang ID, porch occupants, trash with marijuana) supplied a fair probability of weapons/narcotics.	The tip was anonymous and unreliable; corroboration was only "innocent details;" discarded marijuana in trash was insufficient; warrant lacked probable cause.	The court held the affidavit provided probable cause under the totality of the circumstances; corroboration and trash evidence, combined with the tip, were sufficient.
Scope: search of vehicle on premises described in warrant	Vehicle in the driveway was within the scope of the premises search; affidavit anticipated weapons could be in vehicles on the property.	Warrant described the house but not the vehicle specifically; searching the Sentra exceeded the warrant’s scope.	The court held the vehicle search was valid—cars parked on the described premises may be searched when connected to the premises and contemplated by the affidavit.

State v. Hill, 288 Neb. 767, 851 N.W.2d 670 (probable cause and warrant standard; totality-of-the-circumstances review)
State v. Vermuele, 234 Neb. 973, 453 N.W.2d 441 (no requirement that the alleged crime itself be fully corroborated to support probable cause)
State v. Lytle, 255 Neb. 738, 587 N.W.2d 665 (informant reliability frameworks for warrants)
Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (totality-of-the-circumstances test for informant tips)
U.S. v. Briscoe, 317 F.3d 906 (recognizing courts may consider possession of marijuana as evidence for probable cause)
U.S. v. Pennington, 287 F.3d 739 (vehicle on premises may be searched when affidavit links vehicle to premises and the items sought)