Opinion ID: 2637920
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Well-Founded Suspicion of Violation of a Condition of Release

Text: The arrest of Petitioner Fisher under the bench warrant in this case was not reasonable because the State in its application for the bench warrant did not provide specific and articulable facts of a willful violation of any condition of her release pending sentencing. The Fourth Amendment requires, at a minimum, that the information the officer relies upon at least carry some indicia of reliability. [93] The application and affidavit submitted in support of the bench warrant for arrest of Petitioner did not provide any indicia of reliability or specificity that Petitioner had violated any condition of her release. [94] There was at best a vague suggestion that she might have violated the condition that she have no violation of any criminal laws. But there is absolutely no indication of what laws, if any, she might have violated. The simplest test is to ask the question, what condition of her release does the State in its application claim was violated by Petitioner Fisher? From the record in this case, the answer can only be none, even applying the well-founded suspicion standard. Decisions of our Courts of Appeal have addressed the question of probable cause and well-founded suspicion for arrests without warrants. [95] While not squarely on point with this case, they are of value at least in focusing on conceptual references. In State v. Simms , a warrantless search of a parolee's home, based upon an anonymous tip that the informant and defendant were engaged in a drug operation at the defendant's home, was held unconstitutional. The court stated the Fourth Amendment requires that before a parole officer can act upon the tip of an informer, the information upon which the officer acts must at least carry some indicia of reliability to support an inference that the informant is telling the truth.... [H]e must make some attempt to ascertain that he is acting on something more than casual rumor, general reputation, or a mere whim. [96] In State v. Patterson , a warrantless search of a parolee's vehicle, upon an anonymous tip substantiated by other evidence, was held to be based upon reasonable suspicion. [97] In that case, the store clerk on duty at the time of the robbery identified the defendant in a photomontage and there was other evidence to connect the parolee with the robbery, thus constituting reasonable suspicion. In State v. Lucas , probation officers observed a container of marijuana in the defendant's home. Four days later the officers conducted a warrantless search of the home. The court concluded that this observation, coupled with the fact the defendant acted in a nervous manner when the officers arrived at his home to conduct a transfer interview, constituted a well-founded suspicion that the defendant was involved in criminal activity in violation of his conditions of release. [98] The affidavit of Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Acosta supporting the bench warrant in this case does not meet the well-founded suspicion standard. The unidentified probationer's statement concerning what Petitioner Fisher allegedly said in court and the probationer's impression of Petitioner's physical state do not have any indicia of reliability or truthfulness. [99] Mere claims by the unnamed grandmother of Petitioner's child that she knew Petitioner spent considerable time at a known drug user's home and used drugs there bears no indicia of reliability. Detective Castillo's observation that Petitioner visited a known drug user's home, even if true, does not constitute a violation of any condition of her release. The facts asserted in the application and affidavit do not measure up to the necessary well-founded suspicion that Petitioner Fisher violated any condition of her release pending sentencing to justify the Superior Court's issuance of a bench warrant for her arrest. The consequent arrest violated Petitioner's Fourth Amendment due process rights. Therefore, the evidence obtained as a result of the unlawful arrest should have been suppressed in her criminal trial. [100]