Opinion ID: 803418
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Mercer Affidavit

Text: Rigaud's suppression arguments based on the Mercer affidavit are difficult to understand. First, he argues that the fruits of Carney-Hatch's August 24, 2006, undercover buy should have been suppressed because Trainor, who introduced Carney-Hatch and Rigaud, had been using crack without the government's permission and her observations were undoubtedly affected by her addiction. He also argues that the Mercer affidavit was as materially disingenuous as Molis'[s] . . . because he adopts the legitimacy of the five controlled buys [and] . . . vouches for [Trainor,] boasting that she has provided accurate, truthful, and reliable information in the past and continues to do so in the present (internal quotation marks omitted). Rigaud alleges that if Mercer's affidavit had stated that Molis had not searched Trainor or had searched her inadequately, there would have been insufficient probable cause to issue warrants and, thus, any fruits from the search and arrest should have been suppressed. Regarding the fruits of the ATF undercover buy, the government argues that because Rigaud did not identify a constitutional violation related to that buy, suppression is inappropriate. The government also argues that even if information about Trainor's side buys and her drug use were included in the Mercer affidavit, there was sufficient probable cause to issue the search and arrest warrants. -16- The government is correct that the buy was not a search or seizure and hence it did not implicate Rigaud's Fourth Amendment rights. Thus, the exclusionary rule is simply inapplicable. See Garcia-Hernandez, 659 F.3d at 112. To the extent that Rigaud seeks to challenge the Mercer affidavit as the basis for subsequent search and arrest warrants, he states only that the warrants should not have issued and any of the fruits from the search and arrest should have been suppressed. This undeveloped argument fails for the same reason that the challenge to the Molis affidavit fails. Affirmed. -17-