United States v. Joseph Meling

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the omission of an informant’s ten-year-old convictions and receipt of a $100,000 reward was immaterial
• holding that an informant’s 8 history of forgery and fraud did not render his testimony incredible where corroborating evidence 9 was presented in the statement of probable cause
• explaining that when other information 24 supports a finding of probable cause, an informant’s low credibility is inconsequential
• “[T]he fact that an informant has an ulterior or impure motive in coming forward to provide information to the police does not preclude a finding that the informant is nevertheless credible.”
• failure to disclose that key witness had been diagnosed with hallucinations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).