State v. Siler

Syllabus

The defendant, who had been convicted, on a conditional plea of nolo contendere, of the crimes of possession of narcotics with intent to sell and criminal possession of a firearm, appealed to this court, claiming that the trial court improperly denied his motion to suppress certain evidence that was seized from his residence by the police. Relying on information from a confidential informant, the police executed a search and seizure warrant at the defendant's residence, where they recovered drugs, firearms and other contraband. The police affidavit that accompa- nied the warrant application had described two controlled purchases of heroin and stated that the police surveilled the defendant's residence while the confidential informant contacted the defendant and arranged to meet him at a specific location to complete the transaction. The confidential informant had given the police a description of the defen- dant, whom he knew as G, and the car that he drove as well as G's telephone number and the location of his residence. The police thereafter identified the defendant as the person described by the confidential informant through a check of law enforcement databases and the Office of Adult Probation after the police learned that he was on probation in connection with a prior robbery. Prior to the controlled drug purchases, the police also conducted surveillance at the defendant's residence, where they saw a male who matched the description provided by the confidential informant enter the same type of vehicle that had been described by the confidential informant. Thereafter, when shown an unmarked photograph of the defendant by the police, the confidential informant immediately identified the individual in the photograph as G. On appeal, the defendant urged this court to overrule our Supreme Court's decision in State v. Barton (219 Conn. 529), in which the court adopted a totality of the circumstances analysis for the determination of probable cause under article fir