State v. McLain
2011 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 496
| Tex. Crim. App. | 2011Background
- Hale County grand jury indicted McLain for possession with intent to deliver methamphetamine (4–200 grams).
- Police executed a warrant at McLain's residence and shop on Feb. 27, 2009, seizing over 100 grams of meth.
- Trial suppressed based on lack of time-frame reference in the affidavit; appellate court affirmed; warrant challenged on probable-cause grounds.
- Affidavit alleged informants, surveillance, and ongoing drug activity at the property; asked to keep informant identity confidential.
- Appellate and trial courts focused on the phrase “in the past 72 hours” as time of observed drug possession, not when information was received.
- Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reverses and remands, holding the affidavit could support probable cause under a commonsense, reasonable-inference standard.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appellate review was hypertechnical in interpreting the affidavit | McLain contends hypertechnical parsing was improper | State contends strict grammar reading appropriate | Yes; appellate violated deference to magistrate's inference |
| Whether the affidavit, viewed as a whole, supports probable cause | McLain argues lack of precise timing defeats probable cause | State argues overall context supports probable cause | Yes; magistrate could infer timely possession under totality of the facts |
| Whether deference to the magistrate’s implicit probable-cause finding was properly applied | McLain asserts insufficient deference to magistrate’s implicit finding | State urges great deference to magistrate’s assessment | Yes; appellate failed to defer properly to magistrate |
Key Cases Cited
- Flores v. State, 827 S.W.2d 416 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 1992) (present-tense holdings support prob. cause when ongoing activity shown)
- Rodriguez v. State, 232 S.W.3d 55 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (deference to magistrate; commonsense interpretation of affidavits)
- Gates v. Illinois, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (probable cause under totality of circumstances; defer to magistrate)
- Swearingen v. State, 143 S.W.3d 808 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (timeliness/staleness considerations influenced by ongoing enterprise)
- Hall v. State, 795 S.W.2d 195 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990) (standard for appellate review of affidavits; not hypertechnical)