A search warrant affidavit stating: 'LEO has received reliable information from a credible person that marijuana is being kept at defendant's residence for the purpose of sale' is legally insufficient.

• A. Legally insufficient
• B. Legally sufficient
• C. Legally sufficient if corroborated
• D. Legally insufficient if the informant is anonymous

Answer: (A)

Probable cause for a search warrant must be grounded in facts that would lead a reasonable person to believe contraband is at the location and that the person or premises to be searched is connected to it. A statement that an informant is “reliable” and a “credible person” does not, by itself, establish probable cause. The affidavit must describe concrete facts and the basis of the informant’s knowledge—how the informant learned the information, what was observed, and when or where it occurred—or show independent corroboration of those facts.

Here, the only assertions are that a credible informant says marijuana is being kept at the residence for sale, with no details about how the informant knows this, what was observed, specific information about the informant’s basis of knowledge, or any corroboration by independent evidence. Without those specifics, the magistrate cannot assess the reliability of the tip or the likelihood that marijuana is actually present and connected to sale, so the affidavit fails to meet probable cause.

If the informant’s basis of knowledge and credibility were explained, or if independent corroboration existed (surveillance, independent observations, or corroborating tips), the information could potentially be sufficient. But as stated, it is legally insufficient.