State v. McGill
125 So. 3d 343
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- The State appeals an order suppressing evidence seized from McGill’s home pursuant to a search warrant.
- The affidavit alleged a confidential informant identified McGill as a mid- to high-level cannabis dealer and claimed large quantities of cannabis and cash were in his residence, with corroborating surveillance.
- Surveillance yielded a vehicle arrival at McGill’s home, a subsequent traffic stop where cannabis was found on the occupant, who stated he routinely bought cannabis from McGill.
- A second informant and surveillance on August 10, 2011 led to Calderone being observed at McGill’s residence, a later traffic stop with cannabis and a canine alert; Calderone had cash at his person.
- McGill’s prior drug-related offenses were noted in the affidavit, including prior cannabis possessions and paraphernalia charges.
- A magistrate issued a warrant to search McGill’s home, where one to two pounds of cannabis were seized and McGill was arrested; the trial court later denied suppression.
- The trial court concluded the affidavit lacked a date for the informant’s initial observation and doubted the first traffic-stop linkage, and misapplied the good-faith rule.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the affidavit establish probable cause to search McGill’s home? | State: affidavit, with continuing pattern and corroboration, showed probable cause. | McGill: insufficient facts and stale information; lack of date and weak nexus. | Probable cause established; warrant valid. |
| Does the good faith exception apply despite a probable-cause dispute? | State: good faith exception applies because magistrate’s decision was reasonable. | McGill: exclusion should apply if affidavit lacks probable cause. | Good faith exception applies; reversal of suppression. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Felix, 942 So.2d 5 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (establishes nexus requires timing and location for probable cause)
- Jenkins v. State, 924 So.2d 20 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (informant reliability and corroboration affect admissibility)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (U.S. 1983) (totality of the circumstances standard for probable cause)
- Paige, 934 So.2d 595 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (probability information and staleness considerations on premises)
- Hudson v. State, 368 So.2d 899 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979) (continuing pattern reduces staleness concerns)
- State v. Sabourin, 39 So.3d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (good faith analysis in Florida post-Gates framework)