Good faith exception inapplicable, rules Wisconsin Court of Appeals.

Byline: David Ziemer

A suspect's sending marijuana through the mail, standing alone, is insufficient grounds to support a search warrant for the sender's home, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals held on May 15. In addition, the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule does not apply, although it clearly would if the case were charged in federal court. Christopher Sloan took a box to a UPS station to ship to "Dave Slaon" [sic] in Florida. UPS has a sign posted, reserving the right to open any parcels. Based on the clerk's suspicions, the UPS supervisor opened the box and called to police to report what he suspected was a canister containing marijuana. The responding police officer inspected the package and confirmed that it contained marijuana. Based on this evidence, a search warrant was issued for Sloan's residence. There, police discovered a grow operation, and Sloan was charged with manufacture of a controlled substance. He moved to suppress all the evidence, but the trial court denied the motion. Sloan appealed, and, in a decision written by Judge Joan F. Kessler and joined by Judge Patricia S. Curley, the court affirmed the denial of the suppression motion concerning the evidence discovered in the package, but reversed the denial of the motion as it concerned the evidence found at Sloan's home. Judge Ralph Adam Fine dissented from the latter holding. In affirming the denial of the motion regarding the evidence in the UPS package, the court concluded that officer did no more than replicate the search of the UPS supervisor, which indisputably did not violate the Fourth Amendment. However, the court concluded the evidence was insufficient to support the search warrant for Sloan's home. The trial court had concluded that there was an insufficient nexus between the information in the affidavit and the house to be searched, so probable cause was lacking. However, the court held the Leon good faith exception to the exclusionary rule applicable, stating, "If I were confronted with this affidavit, I think I would have issued the warrant." Turning to probable cause, the court distinguished the search warrant from those which authorize a search of the contraband's destination, after contraband is found in the mail. The affidavit stated that, in the officer's experience, persons who traffic in controlled substances usually keep records of their transactions at home. However, the court found this insufficient, observing, "What [the officer] does...