United States v. Sutton
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 2499
| 7th Cir. | 2014Background
- CI with prior reliable tip to KAMEG told Agent Lombardi he had recently seen an individual called "Cap" possess about one ounce of cocaine at 1525 West Station St., Apt. 1W, and said the apartment tenant was Nikiya Foster (whom CI described as closely associated with "Cap").
- Lombardi matched the alias "Cap" to Todd Sutton in law-enforcement records, showed the CI Sutton’s booking photo (CI confirmed), and drove the CI past the identified address (CI confirmed location).
- The CI signed a John Doe affidavit to preserve anonymity and swore to firsthand observation within 1–10 days of May 2, 2010; Lombardi submitted a corroborating affidavit describing the CI and steps taken to verify details.
- A county judge issued a search warrant; officers found ~63 grams of crack cocaine in a bedroom closet, drug paraphernalia, clothing matching Sutton, a handwritten reference to "Cap," and a video of Sutton in the apartment.
- Sutton was indicted, moved to suppress (arguing staleness, uncorroborated/baseless CI, recklessness/falsehoods), lost; he pleaded guilty while preserving the right to appeal the suppression denial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Government) | Defendant's Argument (Sutton) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause for the warrant | Affidavits (CI + agent) provided sufficient detail, corroboration, and judge gave deference | Warrant lacked probable cause; CI information was unreliable and insufficient | Probable cause existed; warrant upheld |
| Corroboration of CI's tip | Agent corroborated identity, address, and tenancy; CI appeared in person to sign affidavit | CI's statements were uncorroborated and hence unreliable | Corroboration was adequate (photo ID, drive-by, tenant record) |
| Staleness of information | Information was recent (1–10 days) and CI had prior reliability; no bright-line rule | CI's single observed occurrence up to 10 days earlier rendered tip stale | Not stale when viewed with other factors; 10 days did not defeat probable cause |
| CI credibility and accuracy | CI previously provided useful info, swore before magistrate, sought leniency but still permissible | CI misidentified Foster as girlfriend (she was cousin), sought leniency, only one prior corroboration — therefore unreliable | CI credibility sufficient (de minimis relationship error; prior reliability; in-person affidavit) |
Key Cases Cited
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (totality-of-the-circumstances test for informant-based probable cause)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984) (good-faith exception to exclusionary rule)
- United States v. Sims, 551 F.3d 640 (7th Cir. 2008) (deference to magistrate and limits on "bare bones" affidavits)
- United States v. Searcy, 664 F.3d 1119 (7th Cir. 2011) (factors for evaluating informant information: firsthand knowledge, detail, corroboration, timing)
- United States v. Garcia, 528 F.3d 481 (7th Cir. 2008) (informant specificity can be minimal yet sufficient with corroboration)
- United States v. Pappas, 592 F.3d 799 (7th Cir. 2010) (no bright-line staleness rule; age of information is one factor)