Henry H. Howe v. Steven Gilpin, et al.

This Court has made clear that in cases where a search or arrest warrant affidavit is based on an informant’s report, probable cause determinations are informed by a “totality of the circumstances” analysis where reliability, veracity, and basis of knowledge are all highly relevant considerations. Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 103 S. Ct. 2317, 76 L. Ed. 2d 527 (1983)). Within the context of this Gates analysis, Circuit Courts have emphasized that a search or arrest warrant affidavit’s “complete omission of information regarding [a confidential informant’s (CI’s)] credibility may be “insurmountable”, and that such an omission may undermine the deference (courts) would otherwise give to the decision of the magistrate to issue the (search or arrest) warrant.” See, e.g., United States v. Glover, 755 F.3d 811, 816 (7th Cir. 2014) Although in general, no one factor necessarily dooms a search warrant, in cases that “test the sufficiency of affidavits for warrants obtained based on informants,” information about the informant’s credibility or potential bias “is crucial.” Id. The first question presented is: Whether complete omission from an arrest warrant of a primary confidential informant’s multiple prior Rule 609 [F.R.Evid.] “dishonesty and false statement” convictions actually known to the law enforcement warrant affiant – convictions for TheftFalse Representation, Theft By Swindle, Bigamy, “Theft More Than $35,000”, Aggravated Forgery, and Check Forgery – is an omission which causes the warrant to be invalid if the warrant-issuing judge’s