Opinion ID: 1253585
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Good Faith under Leon

Text: Evidence seized pursuant to a warrant that is later determined to be invalid will not be suppressed if the officers executing the warrant acted in good faith reliance on its validity. Suppression is required only if (1) the issuing judge was misled by the affiant's knowing or reckless false statement, a contention we have rejected in Part II, (2) the issuing judge wholly abandoned his judicial role, which is not an issue in this case, (3) the supporting affidavit was so lacking in indicia of probable cause as to render official belief in its existence entirely unreasonable, or (4) the warrant was so facially deficient that the executing officer could not reasonably presume its validity. Leon, 468 U.S. at 923, 104 S.Ct. 3405. Issues (3) and (4) turn on the objectively ascertainable question whether a reasonably well trained officer would have known that the search was illegal despite the issuing judge's authorization. United States v. Proell, 485 F.3d 427, 430 (8th Cir.2007) (quotation omitted). The record demonstrates that Agent Perry and Captain Dunaski relied in good faith on the validity of the thermal imaging warrant. Perry's supporting affidavit was based on information provided by a CD with first hand knowledge of the facts reported. There is an inherent indicia of reliability in the richness and detail of a first hand observation. United States v. Warford, 439 F.3d 836, 842 (8th Cir.2006) (quotation omitted). That information was substantially corroborated by Perry's review of Kattaria's criminal history and the electric utility records. Perry's affidavit explained that indoor marijuana cultivation requires a high heat ... tropical type environment, meaning that abnormally high electric power consumption was reason to suspect a continuing indoor grow operation. The affidavit further explained, The cultivation of marijuana requires a well vented location that allows some heat to escape and fresh air to enter. This heat that is vented from the grow location can be detected using thermal imagery. Perry was fully justified in believing that the issuing judge relied on that information in issuing the warrant. Cf. United States v. McCoy, 483 F.3d 862, 864 (8th Cir.2007). The three subsequent warrants were supported by affidavits setting forth the results of the thermal imaging, which further corroborated the CD's information, and additional information gathered by Agent Perry's on-going investigation. It is not objectively unreasonable to execute a warrant where there was evidence to corroborate [an informant's] tip and where an independent magistrate had found that the affidavit stated probable cause. United States v. Koons, 300 F.3d 985, 991 (8th Cir.2002); see United States v. Tagbering, 985 F.2d 946, 951 (8th Cir.1993). As the officers executing all four search warrants acted in good faith reliance on their validity, the motion to suppress was properly denied under Leon. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the denial of Kattaria's motion to suppress and motion for a Franks hearing. Kattaria also appealed his sentence, arguing it was unreasonable, but he did not petition for rehearing en banc of the panel's adverse resolution of that issue. We vacated the entire panel opinion in granting rehearing en banc. We now affirm the sentence for the reasons stated in the panel opinion. Kattaria, 503 F.3d at 708-09. The judgment of the district court is affirmed.