State v. Hidalgo, 296 Neb. 912

Omaha police received an anonymous Crime Stoppers tip that a Hispanic male called “Roberto” (nickname “Sporty”), an active member of the 18th Street gang aged about 30–35, lived at a specific Omaha address and possessed illegal firearms.
Officers surveilled the address, observed several tattooed Hispanic males on the porch, and saw a white Nissan Sentra registered to Robert Hidalgo and Jacqueline Linares in the driveway.
Utilities at the address listed Linares; a nighttime trash pull from the property produced a piece of mail to the address and marijuana stems/seeds/leaves.
Affidavit for a search warrant sought marijuana and records, monies, weapons, and ammunition related to a narcotics operation; warrant described the house and authorized searching the location and persons.
Execution of the warrant yielded marijuana and firearms in the residence, a firearm in a neighboring yard, and a firearm recovered from the Nissan Sentra; Hidalgo later admitted the gun in the car was his.
Hidalgo (a prior felony accessory conviction) was convicted after a stipulated bench trial of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person; he appealed, arguing the warrant lacked probable cause and the vehicle search exceeded the warrant’s scope.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Probable cause for search warrant	Warrant lacked probable cause because anonymous tip reliability wasn't established; corroboration was only of innocent details; trash pull marijuana was insufficient.	Tip corroborated by multiple non-innocent facts: name/vehicle/utility records, gang membership/nickname, matching demographic observations, and marijuana in trash — together provided a fair probability of contraband.	Court held affidavit provided probable cause under the totality of the circumstances; corroboration and trash evidence supplemented the tip.
Scope of warrant: vehicle search	Vehicle was not listed in warrant, so searching the Sentra violated the Fourth Amendment.	Vehicle was parked in the driveway contiguous to the described residence, officers and magistrate anticipated weapons could be in vehicles on the property; vehicles on premises may be searched under a premises warrant.	Court held vehicle search valid: car in driveway was within the scope of the warrant.

State v. Hill, 288 Neb. 767 (discussing probable cause and review standards for warrants)
Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (totality-of-the-circumstances test for informant tips and probable cause)
State v. Vermuele, 234 Neb. 973 (1990) (no requirement that the crime itself be independently corroborated to justify probable cause)
State v. Lytle, 255 Neb. 738 (1998) (informant reliability factors and necessity of affidavit to show basis for informant’s knowledge)
U.S. v. Pennington, 287 F.3d 739 (8th Cir. 2002) (vehicles on described premises may be searched under a premises warrant)