Opinion
ID No. 0808016768.
January 6, 2009.
John R. Garey, Esquire, Dover, DE.
John W. Donahue, IV, Esquire, Department of Justice, Georgetown, DE.
Dear Counsel:
The defense has filed a timely Motion to Suppress evidence obtained following the execution of a search warrant, as well as a subsequent statement of the Defendant as being the "fruit of the poisonous tree".
The defense correctly notes that the suppression question is to be decided based upon the four corners of the warrant affidavit.
The information provided by the "concerned citizen" and the "confidential informant" did not provide probable cause for a search. But the further investigation taken, together with the information provided by the confidential informant and concerned citizen, did provide probable cause.
The further investigation was the surveillance of the Defendant which included the conduct involving a female entering the Defendant's vehicle for a short time and then exiting, the subsequent stop of the female, and her Mirandized statement that the Defendant delivered a Percocet pill to her for $20.00, and finally the finding of the alleged pill in the female's vehicle.
Thus, the investigation established probable cause the Defendant was directly involved in the illegal sale of drugs. Probable cause for a warrant of both the vehicle and the residence existed when adding the information provided by the confidential informant that he/she was regularly buying drugs from the Defendant, and by the concerned citizen that there was a large amount of vehicular traffic at the Defendant's house at all hours of the day, and the visitors only stayed a brief period of time.
Therefore, considering the entire contents of the affidavit, I am satisfied under a totality of the circumstances, that probable cause existed for the warrant.
The Motion to Suppress is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.