Opinion ID: 1180163
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Affidavit and Issuance of the Warrant

Text: The warrant was issued on the basis of affidavits submitted by the undisclosed informant and by Officer Celmer, the latter essentially repeating the statements of the former. The informant's affidavit in substance is as follows: On or about February 3, 1971, he went to 1267 Fairywood Lane, a white single-story plaster house with red trim and redwood siding, surrounded on three sides by a six-foot wood fence. He was taken to the west bedroom of the house and there observed a pile of marijuana bricks, two feet high by three feet wide by one foot (one brick) deep, containing 20 to 50 bricks. A white male, 22 to 27 years of age, 5 feet 11 inches in height, weighing 170 pounds, with dark curly hair, whose name he did not know, gave him two and a half bricks weighing approximately five pounds. The informant was to return to Laguna Beach within two weeks with $300 for the marijuana. He was also given three pills by the described subject and was told one of the pills was LSD. The affidavit further relates that the informant took the bricks to the Los Angeles airport, that he was arrested by a federal marshal and the bricks and pills seized; that he had never been convicted of a crime of moral turpitude but had been convicted of minor traffic violations; and that he had smoked marijuana on numerous occasions and knows its appearance and smell. Both affidavits were subscribed and sworn to in the presence of the issuing magistrate. The magistrate also examined the confidential informant before the warrant was issued; this examination was not, however, recorded and transcribed. During the examination, the magistrate took handwritten notes. After he issued the search warrant, he sealed the signed affidavit of the informant and his notes in an envelope which was to be opened only on order of court. [1] At the preliminary hearing, the magistrate read the contents of his handwritten notes into the record: Then I will relate to you the gist of the conversation as I reported it in my handwriting, handwritten notes, and I am going to exclude therefrom anything that I think would indicate in detail the identity of the informant. .... .... .... .... .... ... ... The first thing is, `lived in,' and then, `blank' as a city, which was given to me. Then comes the statement about where he sleeps. The next question and answer have to do with his place of birth. The next question had to do with his father's occupation. To all of these, he responded to them. The next one had to do with the place he last worked for and where. .... .... .... .... .... ... The place he last worked or the persons he last worked for and where. And next his marital status. For the record, those were considered by me as preliminary questions so that I could watch him and see his reactions. Questions were asked and answers given to determine his honesty or lack thereof, or competence or lack thereof. Then he was sworn in to speak only the truth. Then he described a meeting with a person he named and identified. Then he related to me, in response to my question, that he had been made no promise, except that he wanted to co-operate. That is the gist of two or three questions and answers. Then the question was asked and answered by him as to when and where he first smoked marijuana. Then questions and answers of his medical history and questions concerning his personal history. And then the questions concerning  the questions and answers concerning any credit sale of marijuana kilos. Now, all of those questions and answers for your information or for the record, whatever you wish, were asked by me and the answers were recorded by me to show what happened. But the purpose in asking the questions was to determine from the nature and kind of response he was making not whether those things were true or important, but generally what his demeanor was. And I considered none of those things as having any importance on the affidavit which he signed or having any importance on the issuance of a warrant, save and except they aided me in determining that he was  I am trying to think of an appropriate word. He was reasonably straight-forward and reasonably honest insofar as that is capable of being done in a ten to 15 minute interview....