State v. King

In issuing a warrant, the magistrate could reasonably conclude that the totality of the facts set out in the affidavit, separate from the informant's allegations, sufficiently corroborated the anonymous informant's statements.

The State appealed the trial court's decision granting Defendant’s motion to suppress evidence discovered during a search pursuant to a search warrant. Defendant was charged with unlawful possession, delivery, and manufacture of marijuana. Law enforcement became aware of the Defendant’s actions based on two anonymous calls reporting suspicious activity at the Defendant’s residence, after which further investigation was conducted. Defendant argued that since the anonymous caller’s information could not be verified or established to be reliable, the affidavit in support of the warrant was weak and the evidence obtained during the search should be suppressed. The trial court agreed. On appeal, the State argued that the trial court erred. The Court agreed and held that although the anonymous caller’s information could not be confirmed, the officer developed a significant amount of other information to establish unlawful marijuana growth at the Defendant’s residence. Thus, sufficient information existed to support a determination that probable cause existed and the warrant was properly issued to search the residence. Reversed and remanded