3:14-cr-05499
W.D. Wash.Jul 29, 2015Background
- On Sept. 16, 2013, Detective Shane Hall obtained warrants to search multiple residences and warehouse units in Vancouver, WA; police executed those warrants on Sept. 19, 2013 and seized firearms, drugs, and cash at several locations.
- Subsequent investigation led to warrants for two storage-unit searches (Sept. 27, 2013) where further drugs and paraphernalia were found.
- Torres‑Ambriz was indicted federally for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine; he moved to suppress evidence obtained from the searches (Dkt. 24).
- At the state level, a partially successful suppression motion was decided by the state superior court; state charges were later dismissed and federal charges filed.
- Torres‑Ambriz argued the warrants lacked probable cause because informant information was innocent or unreliable, some information was stale, and the Leon good‑faith exception should not apply.
- The district court denied the suppression motion, finding the affidavits (1) supplied reliable, corroborated informant information about controlled buys and ongoing drug activity, (2) were not stale given the ongoing conspiracy and dated entries, and (3) were reasonable for officers to rely on under United States v. Leon.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause for warrants | Govt: totality of circumstances and corroborated controlled buys establish probable cause | Torres‑Ambriz: informant tips were innocent detail or unreliable | Court: probable cause supported by controlled buys, corroboration, and informant reliability |
| Informant reliability | Govt: known/proven informant tips and corroboration make them reliable | Torres‑Ambriz: informants anonymous/unproven and thus unreliable | Court: affidavit showed sufficient reliability (controlled buys, corroboration) |
| Staleness of information | Govt: ongoing conspiracy and many dated transactions justify timeliness | Torres‑Ambriz: long investigation, some buys undated → stale | Court: not stale given ongoing activity and multiple dated controlled buys |
| Good‑faith exception (Leon) | Govt: officers reasonably relied on magistrate’s warrants | Torres‑Ambriz: warrants so lacking that Leon shouldn’t apply | Court: Leon applies; affidavits not so deficient that no reasonable officer could rely on them |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Chavez‑Miranda, 306 F.3d 973 (9th Cir.) (probable cause assessed under the totality of the circumstances)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (U.S.) (established totality‑of‑the‑circumstances test for probable cause)
- United States v. Rowland, 464 F.3d 899 (9th Cir.) (factors for evaluating confidential informant reliability)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (U.S.) (good‑faith exception to exclusionary rule)
- United States v. Gann, 732 F.2d 714 (9th Cir.) (staleness evaluated in light of nature of criminal activity)
- United States v. Greany, 929 F.2d 523 (9th Cir.) (staleness inquiry depends on facts and property sought)