United States v. Tanguay
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 8556
| 1st Cir. | 2015Background
- In Feb 2010, police received an anonymous e-mail (signed "Jim Garrold") alleging Jonathan Tanguay had child pornography on his laptop; the e-mail led police to investigate Tanguay.
- Sgt. Carrie Nolet interviewed the informant, Josh Wiggin, who identified himself, described a long-term sexual relationship with Tanguay, and reported seeing videos/thumbnails depicting boys as young as eight to sixteen on Tanguay's laptop.
- Before the interview Nolet learned from another officer (Sgt. Broyer) that Wiggin was a known "police groupie," had been "quirky" and "troubled," and had past legal "scrapes," including a conviction for altering a prescription; Nolet did not investigate those remarks further or ask for details.
- Nolet’s sworn affidavit for a search warrant relayed Wiggin’s interview but omitted (1) Broyer’s comments about Wiggin’s reputation, (2) Wiggin’s altered-prescription conviction, and (3) Wiggin’s pre-interview typed notes that described the video as "young man or teen" rather than prepubescent children.
- A warrant issued; a search recovered computer media containing大量 sexually explicit images/videos of minors; Tanguay was indicted and convicted for possession of child pornography and moved to suppress alleging Franks violations based on intentional/reckless omissions and failure to investigate.
- The district court found Nolet recklessly omitted three clusters of information but held that (a) inclusion of those facts would not destroy probable cause, and (b) as a matter of law an affiant has no duty to conduct further inquiry into facts unknown to her when applying for a warrant. The First Circuit remanded on the latter point for further factfinding.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the affidavit, reformed to include recklessly omitted facts, still supported probable cause | Reformed affidavit lacks probable cause once omitted facts (prescription conviction, reputation, notes) are included | Even with omitted facts added, totality of circumstances still gives fair probability of finding child pornography | Reformed affidavit still supports probable cause (court upheld district court’s factual conclusion) |
| Whether an affiant has a duty to investigate further when she has an obvious reason to doubt an informant's veracity | Nolet had red flags about Wiggin; failure to inquire (which likely would have revealed a prior false-report conviction) was reckless and violates Franks | General rule: failure to investigate does not usually show reckless disregard; district court said no categorical duty to inquire | An affiant can have a duty to pursue further inquiry when there is an obvious, unexplored reason to doubt the informant; remanded for factfinding on whether Nolet had such an obligation and, if so, whether her failure was reckless and whether new facts would defeat probable cause |
Key Cases Cited
- Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (establishes test for evidentiary hearing where affidavit contains knowingly or recklessly false statements)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (totality-of-the-circumstances test for probable cause in warrant affidavits)
- United States v. Ranney, 298 F.3d 74 (1st Cir.) (reckless disregard may be shown by affiant's serious doubts or circumstances giving obvious reasons to doubt)
- United States v. Hadfield, 918 F.2d 987 (1st Cir.) (material omissions can support Franks challenge)
- United States v. Burke, 405 F.3d 66 (1st Cir.) (inference of recklessness from omission requires that omitted information be critical)
- United States v. Gifford, 727 F.3d 92 (1st Cir.) (when relevant info withheld, district court must reassess probable cause de novo)
- St. Amant v. Thompson, 390 U.S. 727 (affiant’s assertions can be evaluated against circumstantial evidence showing obvious reasons to doubt veracity)
- United States v. Chesher, 678 F.2d 1353 (9th Cir.) (recognizing duty to investigate where red flags exist)