United States v. Phillip James Greene

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 affiant need only specify that the confidential informant has given accurate information in the past to qualify as reliable”
• concluding that evidence past forty-eight hours, the informant was at the Proctor of ongoing criminal activity generally can defeat a staleness address with Baraza, when Baraza picked up a large amount claim
• holding that evidence of “continuous and ongoing” narcotics trafficking undermines a staleness claim
• stating that the passage of time becomes less significant when the crime is ongoing or continuous and the place to be searched is a secure operational base for the crime
• upholding finding of probable cause when confidential informant’s last purchase occurred 23 months before the warrant’s issuance
• finding information supplied by an informant two years prior to issuance and execution of search warrant was sufficient to defeat claim of staleness due to ongoing nature of illegal activity because informant had purchased narcotics at least twelve times at defendant’s house

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).