### FILED **APRIL 12,**  **2018 In**  **the Office**  **of the**  **Clerk of** **Court WA**  **State Court**  **of Appeals,**  **Division III** 

**IN THE**  **COURT OF**  **APPEALS OF**  **THE STATE**  **OF WASHINGTON** 

**DIVISION THREE**  **STATE OF**  **WASHINGTON,**

**Respondent,**
**V. JESUS**  **MARTINEZ,**

**Appellant. )** 

**) )**  **) )**  **) )**  **) )**  **) No.**  **34929-2-111**

**UNPUBLISHED OPINION** 

**KORSMO, J.** 

**- Othello** **police executed**  **a search** **warrant and**  **arrested Jesus**  **Martinez after**  **finding evidence of** **a methamphetamine distribution**  **operation in**  **Mr. Martinez's**  **house. A** **named informant provided**  **probable cause**  **for the** **search warrant.**  **Mr. Martinez**  **contends the**  **trial court**  **erred in**  **failing to**  **suppress the**  **evidence obtained**  **in the**  **search, and**  **argues that**  **the affidavit**  **for the**  **search warrant**  **did not**  **establish the informant's**  **basis of** **knowledge or**  **his veracity.**  **We hold**  **that the**  **search warrant was supported**  **by probable**  **cause, and**  **affirm. No.**  **34929-2-III**

**State v.**  **Martinez**

**FACTS Near**  **midnight on**  **April 26,**  **2016, Othello**  **Police Officer**  **David Maulen**  **saw what**  **appeared to**  **be a**  **hand-to-hand drug** **transaction in**  **a convenience**  **store parking**  **lot. Officer**  **Maulen questioned**  **a man**  **involved, who**  **stated that**  **he had** **just bought**  **methamphetamine from**  **the driver**  **of a**  **silver pickup**  **truck. An**  **officer soon**  **stopped the**  **departed pickup**  **and arrested**  **the driver, Raul**  **Gonzalez, who**  **unsuccessfully attempted**  **to hide**  **a baggie** **of methamphetamine**  **in the**  **gravel after**  **he was**  **detained. While**  **being transported** **to the**  **police station,**  **Mr. Gonzalez**  **stated that**  **he wanted**  **to talk** **to officers**  **about the**  **incident. He**  **later waived**  **his Miranda**  **rights and**  **admitted to**  **Officer Maulen**  **that he**  **sold methamphetamine**  **in the**  **parking lot**  **for $7.**  **Mr. Gonzalez**  **stated that**  **two additional**  **baggies of** **crystal methamphetamine**  **were hidden**  **in the**  **pickup's 4x4**  **gear shift** **box. According**  **to Mr.**  **Gonzalez, he**  **obtained the**  **methamphetamine earlier** **that night**  **from his**  **long-time friend**  **Jesse (Jesus)**  **Martinez, also**  **known as**  **"Panther." Clerk's**  **Papers (CP)**  **at 27.**  **Mr. Gonzalez**  **described "Panther's"**  **house as**  **white, with**  **several solar-powered**  **garden lamps**  **and an**  **older red**  **car parked**  **in the**  **driveway. CP**  **at 55.**  **He stated**  **that Panther**  **lived there**  **with his**  **wife and**  **a teenage** 
**son. Officer**  **Maulen had**  **investigated Panther**  **two months**  **earlier for**  **methamphetamine delivery**  **and knew**  **that he**  **drove a**  **white Chevrolet**  **Impala. Mr.**  **Gonzalez affirmed**  **that Panther** **drove a**  **white Impala.** 



### 2**No. 34929-2-111** 

**State v.**  **Martinez**

**Officer Maulen**  **got a**  **warrant to**  **search Mr.**  **Gonzalez's car**  **and discovered**  **methamphetamine in** **the 4x4**  **gear box**  **and $7**  **in cash,**  **as predicted**  **by Mr.**  **Gonzalez. A** 
**woman who**  **had been**  **playing pool**  **with Mr.**  **Gonzalez on**  **the evening**  **of the**  **incident told**  **investigators that**  **she believed**  **Mr. Gonzalez**  **left to**  **visit Panther**  **that night.**  **She also**  **described the**  **solar-powered garden**  **lamps at**  **Panther's house.**  **On April**  **27, 2016,**  **Officer Maulen**  **prepared an**  **affidavit for**  **a warrant**  **to search**  **Mr. Martinez's**  **house. The**  **affidavit included the**  **above details**  **supplied by**  **Mr. Gonzalez,**  **his female**  **friend, and**  **Officer Maulen.**  **Based on** **this affidavit,**  **a district**  **court judge**  **signed the**  **warrant to**  **search Mr.**  **Martinez's house**  **for evidence**  **of the**  **crime of**  **possession of a**  **controlled substance.**  **The search**  **was conducted**  **the next**  **day, netting**  **methamphetamine, cocaine,**  **and evidence**  **of distribution.**  **The State**  **charged Mr.**  **Martinez on**  **April 29,**  **2016 with**  **possession with**  **the intent**  **to deliver**  **cocaine, possession**  **with the**  **intent to**  **deliver methamphetamine,**  **and second**  **degree unlawful**  **possession of** **a firearm.**  **He moved** **to suppress**  **the evidence**  **obtained in**  **the search**  **of his house,**  **arguing in** **part that the**  **affidavit for**  **the warrant lacked** **probable**
**cause. In**  **findings of** **fact and**  **conclusions oflaw**  **entered on**  **December 12,**  **2016, the**  **trial court**  **found that**  **Mr. Gonzalez**  **was a**  **named informant**  **who made**  **statements against**  **his penal**  **interest. For**  **these reasons,**  **the trial**  **court concluded**  **that Mr.**  **Gonzalez "had**  **a heightened**  **reason to**  **be truthful."**  **CP at**  **28. The**  **court thus**  **concluded that**  **probable**
**3 No.**  **34929-2-111**

**State v.**  **Martinez**

**cause existed**  **for the**  **search warrant,**  **and denied**  **the motion**  **to suppress.**  **Mr. Gonzalez** 
**was then**  **convicted on**  **stipulated facts**  **of possession**  **with intent**  **to deliver**  **methamphetamine and**  **second degree**  **unlawful possession**  **of a**  **firearm. DISCUSSION**  **Mr. Martinez's**  **sole issue**  **on appeal**  **is that**  **the search**  **warrant was**  **not supported**  **by probable**  **cause. He**  **contends the**  **search warrant**  **affidavit failed** **to meet**  **the test**  **for informant-based**  **probable cause under Aguilar-Spinelli.**  **See Aguilar**  **v. Texas,**  **378 U.S.**  **108, 84**  **S. Ct.**  **1509, 12**  **L. Ed.**  **2d 723**  **(1964); Spinelli** **v. United** **States, 393**  **U.S. 410,**  **89 S.**  **Ct. 584,**  **21 L.**  **Ed. 2d**  **637 (1969).**  **We review**  **the trial**  **court's legal conclusion**  **that probable**  **cause was**  **established de**  **novo. State**  **v. Chamberlin,**  **161 Wn.2d**  **30, 40,**  **162 P.3d**  **389 (2007).**  **In so**  **doing, we**  **give great**  **deference to** **the magistrate's**  **determination of** **probable cause,**  **and will**  **not disturb** **the magistrate's**  **decision to**  **issue a**  **warrant absent**  **abuse of** **discretion. State**  **v. Vickers,**  **148 Wn.2d**  **91, 108,**  **59 P.3d**  **58 (2002).**  **An affidavit**  **for probable**  **cause to**  **issue a**  **search warrant**  **must set**  **forth facts**  **sufficient for**  **a reasonable**  **person to**  **conclude that**  **the suspect**  **is probably involved**  **in criminal**  **activity and**  **that officers**  **will find**  **evidence of** **that criminal**  **activity at**  **the place**  **to be**  **searched. State**  **v. Ollivier,**  **161 Wn.**  **App. 307,**  **316-17, 254**  **P.3d 883**  **(2011). The**  **affidavit is**  **tested in**  **a "commonsense,**  **non-hypertechnical manner."**  **Chamberlin, 161**  **Wn.2d at**  **41. When**  **an informant's**  **tip provides** **the basis**  **for probable**  **cause to**  **search,**
**4 No.**  **34929-2-III**

**State v.**  **Martinez**
**Washington courts**  **apply the**  **two-pronged Aguilar-Spinelli**  **test, which**  **requires the**  **affidavit for**  **a search**  **warrant to**  **(1) set**  **forth circumstances**  **underlying the**  **informant's conclusions,**  **so that**  **the magistrate**  **can evaluate**  **the reliability**  **of the**  **informant's information**  **(the basis**  **of knowledge** **prong); and**  **(2) set**  **forth circumstances**  **underlying the**  **officer's conclusion**  **that the**  **informant is**  **credible and**  **reliable (the**  **veracity prong).**  **State v.**  **Wolken, 103**  **Wn.2d 823,**  **827, 700**  **P.2d 319**  **(1985); Ollivier,**  **161 Wn.**  **App. at**  **317. Mr.**  **Martinez first**  **challenges the**  **informant's basis**  **of knowledge.**  **He contends**  **the affidavit**  **does not**  **establish that**  **Mr. Gonzalez**  **actually saw**  **controlled substances**  **in Mr.**  **Martinez's house**  **or that**  **Mr. Gonzalez** **had skill**  **or training**  **in identifying**  **those substances.**  **An informant's**  **personal observations of** **the facts**  **is sufficient**  **to support**  **the "basis**  **of knowledge"**  **prong. Wolken,**  **103 Wn.2d**  **at 827.**  **Here, Mr.**  **Gonzalez told**  **officers that**  **he was**  **an old**  **friend of** **Mr. Martinez**  **and had**  **bought methamphetamine**  **from him**  **in the**  **past. Mr.**  **Gonzalez admitted**  **that he**  **had received**  **the methamphetamine**  **involved in** **the $7**  **sale earlier**  **in the**  **day, while**  **visiting Mr.**  **Martinez "at**  **his home."**  **CP at**  **55. While**  **there, Mr.**  **Gonzalez continued,**  **Mr. Martinez**  **pulled half** **an ounce**  **of methamphetamine**  **from his**  **pocket and**  **separated out**  **$40-worth to**  **give to**  **Mr. Gonzalez.**  **These facts**  **are sufficient**  **to establish**  **a reasonable**  **person's conclusion**  **that Mr.**  **Gonzalez had**  **experience**
**5 No.**  **34929-2-111**

**State v.**  **Martinez**
**identifying methamphetamine**  **and had**  **observed the**  **drug in**  **Mr. Martinez's**  **house. See**  **Vickers, 148**  **Wn.2d at**  **108-09 ("a**  **magistrate is**  **entitled to**  **draw reasonable**  **inferences from** **the facts**  **and circumstances**  **set forth**  **in the**  **supporting affidavit").**  **Mr. Martinez**  **also challenges**  **the informant's** **veracity. He**  **argues that**  **the affidavit** 
**was deficient**  **because it**  **did not** **provide any** **background on**  **Mr. Gonzalez's**  **reputation or**  **history of** **providing accurate**  **information to**  **law enforcement,**  **and because**  **it failed**  **to include**  **Mr. Gonzalez's criminal history, which**  **was quite**  **extensive. The**  **veracity prong**  **of the** **Aguilar-Spinelli test**  **seeks to**  **evaluate the** **truthfulness of**  **the informant.**  **Chamberlin; 161**  **Wn.2d at**  **42. Where,**  **as here, the informant does**  **not have**  **a history**  **of providing**  **information to**  **officers, the**  **informant's reliability may**  **be established**  **by circumstances**  **that reasonably**  **assure trustworthiness.**  **Id. at** **41-42; State**  **v. Lair,**  **95 Wn.2d 706, 710, 630 P.2d 427**  **(1981). An**  **admission against**  **penal interest**  **is a**  **factor supporting**  **an informant's**  **reliability, especially**  **when the**  **informant publicly**  **stands by**  **his information.**  **See Chamberlin,**  **161 Wn.2d**  **at 42.**  **Here, Mr.**  **Gonzalez made**  **a statement**  **against his** **penal interest**  **when he**  **admitted that**  **he obtained**  **methamphetamine from**  **Mr. Martinez**  **and then**  **sold some**  **of it**  **in the**  **convenience store** **parking lot**  **for $7.**  **He also**  **accurately predicted** **that officers**  **would find**  **more methamphetamine**  **in the**  **gear shift**  **box of** **his 4x4** **vehicle. Mr.**  **Gonzalez provided**  **accurate descriptions**  **of Mr.**  **Martinez's house.** **and car,**  **of the**  **items found**  **in the** 


### 6**No. 34929-2-111** 

**State v.**  **Martinez**
**4x4, and**  **of the**  **events leading**  **up to**  **his sale**  **of the**  **methamphetamine. This**  **information**
**was corroborated**  **by the**  **friends who**  **accompanied him**  **that night**  **and by**  **Officer Maulen's observations**  **and experience.**  **Altogether, these**  **circumstances support**  **a reasonable** **person's conclusion**  **that Mr.**  **Gonzalez was**  **reliable. Mr.**  **Martinez notes**  **that the**  **affidavit failed** **to reveal**  **that Mr.**  **Gonzalez had**  **an extensive** **criminal history, which Mr.**  **Martinez asserts is**  **evidence that**  **Mr. Gonzales** **is not** **trustworthy. But**  **the superior**  **court rejected**  **this argument**  **because none**  **of the**  **criminal history**  **involved dishonesty.**  **Furthermore, Mr.**  **Gonzales's criminal**  **history, along**  **with his**  **admissions against**  **penal interest,** **were strong**  **motives for**  **him to**  **be accurate**  **in the**  **information he**  **provided to** **the officers,** **especially if** **he hoped**  **for a**  **favorable sentencing**  **recommendation. See**  **Chamberlin, 161**  **Wn.2d at**  **42; State**  **v. Bean,**  **89 Wn.2d**  **467, 471,**  **572 P.2d**  **1102 (1978);**  **Ollivier, 161**  **Wn. App.**  **at 318.**  **CONCLUSION The**  **facts contained**  **in Officer**  **Maulen's affidavit**  **in support**  **of a**  **search warrant** 
**were sufficient**  **to support**  **the magistrate's**  **conclusion that**  **the named**  **informant had**  **a basis**  **of knowledge**  **and was**  **trustworthy, meeting**  **the two-pronged**  **test of** **Aguilar Spinelli.**  **Consequently, the**  **trial court**  **properly concluded**  **that the**  **affidavit supported**  **probable cause**  **to issue**  **the search**  **warrant.**

**7 No.**  **34929-2-III**

**State v.**  **Martinez**

**Affirmed. A**  **majority of** **the panel**  **has determined**  **this opinion** **will not**  **be printed**  **in the**  **Washington Appellate**  **Reports, but**  **it will**  **be filed**  **for public**  **record pursuant**  **to RCW**  **2.06.040.**

**WE CONCUR:** 

**8**