Court Opinion

ID: 2964707
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:29:56.387811+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:43:00.336698
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                            United States Court of Appeals
                                For the First Circuit
                                For the First Circuit
                                 ____________________

        No. 96-1244

                              UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                      Appellee,

                                          v.

                                THAKHONE KHOUNSAVANH,

                                Defendant, Appellant.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

                 [Hon. Francis J. Boyle, Senior U.S. District Judge]
                                         __________________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                 Stahl, Circuit Judge,
                                        _____________

                            Bownes, Senior Circuit Judge,
                                    ____________________

                              and Lynch, Circuit Judge.
                                         _____________
                                 ____________________

            Jennifer Petersen,  with whom  Karl R.D.  Suchecki and  Petersen &
            _________________              ___________________      __________
        Suchecki were on brief, for appellant.
        ________
            Sheldon Whitehouse,  United States  Attorney, with  whom Zechariah
            __________________                                       _________
        Chafee, Assistant United States Attorney, was on brief, for appellee.
        ______

                                 ____________________

                                     May 16, 1997
                                 ____________________

                      BOWNES, Senior Circuit  Judge.  Defendant  Thakhone
                      BOWNES, Senior Circuit  Judge.
                              _____________________

            Khounsavanh   appeals  his   conviction  for   Conspiracy  to

            Distribute  Cocaine Base  and for  Possession with  Intent to

            Distribute Cocaine Base.  See 21 U.S.C.    841(a)(1), 846; 18
                                      ___

            U.S.C.    2.   He contends that  the district court  erred in

            denying his motion to suppress the fruits  of a search on the

            ground  that  the  affidavit underlying  the  search  warrant

            lacked  sufficient  information  to  support   a  finding  of

            probable cause.  We affirm.

                                      The Facts
                                      The Facts
                                      _________

                      On  May 23,  1995, Providence, Rhode  Island police

            officers executed a  search warrant for the  first floor rear

            apartment   at  676-678  Chalkstone  Avenue,  a  three-family

            tenement building.   The  warrant was  based on  an affidavit

            submitted  by  Detective  Freddy  Rocha.   According  to  the

            affidavit, a confidential informant had told  Detective Rocha

            that two men were  storing and selling crack cocaine  in that

            apartment.  The affidavit described the two men as "'Fat Boy'

            Alias John Doe . . . an Asian Male, Unkn. Age.  5'6" Tall and

            170 Lbs.  and 'Turtle' Alias John  Doe.  5'7" 130  Lbs."  The

            informant  also told  the  detective that  he  "could make  a

            purchase  of  cocaine from  this  subject."   (The  affidavit

            alternates several times between referring to the subjects in

            the singular and in the plural.)

                                         -2-
                                          2

                      The detective sought to corroborate the informant's

            story by taking him up  on his offer to conduct  a controlled

            buy  of  cocaine  from  the  apartment  under  the  officer's

            supervision.   According to  the  affidavit, Detective  Rocha

            "drove  to  the Chalkstone  Avenue  area  [and] searched  the

            informant  for contraband.   Finding  none the  informant was

            given  an  amount of  U.S. currency  and  directed to  make a

            purchase  of cocaine from  'Fat Boy' and  'Turtle' at 676-678

            Chalkstone Ave."   The detective watched  the informant enter

            the  building  through the  rear door  and exit  five minutes

            later through the same door.  The detective met the informant

            at a pre-arranged location, where  the informant handed him a

            quantity  of  suspected  cocaine   which  he  stated  he  had

            purchased  from "Fat  Boy."   Tests later  revealed that  the

            substance was indeed cocaine.

                      The detective then applied  for a warrant to search

            the first  floor rear apartment at  676-678 Chalkstone Avenue

            and/or the two men  ("Fat Boy" and "Turtle").   The complaint

            for  the warrant  (which was  sworn to  before a  state court

            judge) added  to the  affidavit's description the  facts that

            "Fat Boy" was approximately twenty-five years old with "short

            hair balding," and that "Turtle" was an Asian male with black

            short hair.   The court  issued the warrant,  both as  to the

            premises and as to the persons of "Fat Boy" and "Turtle."

                                         -3-
                                          3

                      The police executed the warrant the same day.  When

            the police  entered the apartment, two  men who approximately

            fit the  informant's descriptions fled  to a bedroom.   Three

            other people were present in the apartment during the  search

            but did not leave the  room they had been in when  the police

            arrived.  One detective  searched "Fat Boy" and found  in his

            front pants pocket a  plastic bag containing fourteen smaller

            bags  of what tested out as crack cocaine.  Another detective

            found,  in the ceiling of  the kitchen, a  bag containing 650

            smaller bags of crack  cocaine.  Another small bag  of powder

            cocaine was found in the bedroom.   In addition to the drugs,

            the police seized  the wallets and identification  of the two

            men who fled, one of whom is the defendant.   They also found

            in  the apartment and seized a pager, bagging material, and a

            gas bill on which the defendant's name appeared.

                      The defendant  moved to suppress the  fruits of the

            search.  After hearing, the district court denied the motion.

            The defendant then  entered a plea of guilty  to Counts I and

            II of the indictment, and the government dismissed Count III.

            In  his plea  agreement, the  defendant  gave notice  that he

            intended  to appeal  the  denial of  his suppression  motion,

            pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(a)(2).

                                  Standard of Review
                                  Standard of Review
                                  __________________

                      In reviewing a denial  of a suppression motion, the

            district  court's  ultimate legal  conclusion,  including the

                                         -4-
                                          4

            determination that a given  set of facts constituted probable

            cause, is a question of  law subject to de novo review.   See
                                                    _______           ___

            Ornelas  v. United  States,  116 S.  Ct.  1657, 1659  (1996);
            __________________________

            United States v. Zayas-Diaz,  95 F.3d 105, 111 n.6  (1st Cir.
            ___________________________

            1996).  The district court's  findings (if any) of historical

            facts -- "the  events which occurred leading up to  the . . .

            search," Ornelas, 116 S. Ct. at 1661 -- must be upheld unless
                     _______

            they  are clearly erroneous.  See id. at 1663; Zayas-Diaz, 95
                                          ___ ___          __________

            F.3d at 111 n.6.  A  reviewing court must "give due weight to

            inferences  drawn from  those  facts by  resident judges  and

            local  law enforcement  officers."   Ornelas,  116 S.  Ct. at
                                                 _______

            1663.   But  "the  decision whether  these historical  facts,

            viewed  from  the  standpoint of  an  objectively  reasonable

            police officer,  amount to . .  . probable cause" is  a mixed

            question of  law and fact  which we review  de novo.   Id. at
                                                        _______    ___

            1661-63.

                                       Analysis
                                       Analysis
                                       ________

                      The  Fourth Amendment  states:   "The right  of the

            people to be  secure in  their persons,  houses, papers,  and

            effects,  against unreasonable  searches and  seizures, shall

            not  be  violated, and  no  Warrants  shall issue,  but  upon

            probable  cause,  supported  by  Oath   or  affirmation,  and

            particularly  describing the  place to  be searched,  and the

            persons  or things  to be  seized."   U.S. Const.  amend. IV.

            There  is a strong preference for the use of search warrants.

                                         -5-
                                          5

            See Ornelas, 116 S. Ct. at 1663; Payton v. New York, 445 U.S.
            ___ _______                      __________________

            573,  586  (1980).   While  the  warrant  requirement may  be

            dispensed with in certain exigent circumstances that are "few

            in number and carefully  delineated," United States v. United
                                                  _______________________

            States Dist.  Court, 407 U.S.  297, 318 (1972),  the probable
            ___________________

            cause  requirement is rigorously adhered to.   See Arizona v.
                                                           ___ __________

            Hicks, 480  U.S. 321,  326-27, 329  (1987).  "Probable  cause
            _____

            exists  when 'the affidavit  upon which a  warrant is founded

            demonstrates in some trustworthy fashion the  likelihood that

            an  offense has been committed and that there is sound reason

            to  believe that a particular search will turn up evidence of

            it'"  or that  the search  will turn  up contraband.   United
                                                                   ______

            States v. Schaefer, 87 F.3d 562, 565 (1st Cir. 1996) (quoting
            __________________

            United  States v.  Aguirre, 839  F.2d 854,  857-58 (1st  Cir.
            __________________________

            1988)).

                      The   standard  we   apply   in   determining   the

            sufficiency of an affidavit is  whether the "totality of  the

            circumstances" stated in  the affidavit demonstrates probable

            cause  to search  either the  premises or  the person.1   See
                                                                      ___

            Illinois v.  Gates, 462  U.S. 213, 238  (1983).   "[P]robable
            __________________

            cause need  not be  tantamount to  proof beyond  a reasonable

            doubt.  . . . Probability  is the touchstone."   Aguirre, 839
                                                             _______

            F.2d at 857 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).

                                
            ____________________

            1.  "The  issuing magistrate  ordinarily  considers only  the
            facts  set forth  in  supporting affidavits  accompanying the
            warrant application."  Zayas-Diaz, 95 F.3d at 111.
                                   __________

                                         -6-
                                          6

            See Gates, 462 U.S.  at 244 n.13 ("[P]robable  cause requires
            ___ _____

            only   a  probability  or   substantial  chance  of  criminal

            activity,  not an  actual showing  of such  activity.").   To

            establish   probable  cause   for  a  premises   search,  the

            information  available in  the  affidavit must  show "a  fair

            probability that  contraband or evidence  of a crime  will be

            found in  a particular  place."  Id.  at 238.   An  affidavit
                                             ___

            supporting a  request  for a  search  warrant must  give  the

            magistrate a "substantial basis"  upon which to conclude that

            there  is such a "fair probability."  Gates, 462 U.S. at 238-
                                                  _____

            39.   The facts must be judged against an objective standard:

            "would the facts available to the officer at the  moment of .

            . . the search  'warrant a [person] of reasonable  caution in

            the belief' that the action taken was appropriate?"  Terry v.
                                                                 ________

            Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 21-22 (1968).
            ____

                      In  many  cases, as  here,  part of  the  basis for

            probable cause derives from  information that the police have

            obtained  from an informant.   Prior to Gates,  the Court had
                                                    _____

            developed  a  two-pronged test  for such  a  case:   when the

            warrant affidavit rests on hearsay -- an informant's report -

            -  the affidavit must inform  the magistrate "of  some of the

            underlying circumstances from  which the informant  concluded

            that the narcotics were where he claimed they were [the basis

            of knowledge prong], and some of the underlying circumstances

            from which the officer concluded that the informant . . . was

                                         -7-
                                          7

            'credible'   or  his  information  'reliable'  [the  veracity

            prong]."   Aguilar  v.  Texas,  378  U.S.  108,  114  (1964);
                       __________________

            Spinelli v. United States,  393 U.S. 410, 416 (1969).   Gates
            _________________________                               _____

            abandoned   the  notion   that  "these  elements   should  be

            understood as entirely separate and  independent requirements

            to  be rigidly exacted in every case" before a probable cause

            determination  may be  sustained.   Gates, 462  U.S.  at 230.
                                                _____

            Gates  replaced  the  two-pronged  framework of  Aguilar  and
            _____                                            _______

            Spinelli with the totality of the circumstances test.  
            ________

                      While eschewing  a rigid  adherence to each  of the

            Aguilar-Spinelli  factors, Gates maintained  the relevancy of
            ________________           _____

            the considerations set forth in those cases.  The Gates Court
                                                              _____

            surely  did   not  intend   that  its  totality   test  would

            "threaten[]  to  'obliterate  one  of  the  most  fundamental

            distinctions between our  form of government, where  officers

            are  under the law, and  the police-state where  they are the

            law.'"   Gates,  462 U.S.  at 291  (Brennan, J.,  dissenting)
                     _____

            (quoting Johnson v. United  States, 333 U.S. 10, 17  (1948)).
                     _________________________

            Nor  did  Gates  intend for  trial  and  appellate courts  to
                      _____

            abdicate   their   responsibility   to   uphold   the  Fourth

            Amendment's probable cause requirement.   See Hicks, 480 U.S.
                                                      ___ _____

            321.   We have  never read  Gates as  a total  abandonment of
                                        _____

            standards and rules  of law in determining  whether the state

            may intrude on a citizen's privacy.  Nor does Gates mean that
                                                          _____

            reviewing  courts  are writing  on  a  clean  slate  when  we

                                         -8-
                                          8

            confront  the  question of  when  an  informant's information

            rises to the level of probable cause.  The Gates Court agreed
                                                       _____

            that  the   Aguilar  and  Spinelli   factors,  including  "an
                        _______       ________

            informant's   'veracity,'   'reliability'   and   'basis   of

            knowledge' are  all highly relevant in  determining the value

            of his report."   Gates, 462  U.S. at  230; see Schaefer,  87
                              _____                     ___ ________

            F.3d at  566 (the  Aguilar and  Spinelli factors are  "highly
                               _______      ________

            relevant," even after Gates).
                                  _____

                      We  have recently offered  a non-exhaustive list of

            possible factors  that a  magistrate or reviewing  court will

            consider:  

                      Among  others,  the   factors  that   may
                      contribute   to    a   "probable   cause"
                      determination    include    whether    an
                      affidavit    supports     the    probable
                      "'veracity'  or  'basis of  knowledge' of
                      persons  supplying  hearsay information";
                      whether  informant  statements are  self-
                      authenticating; whether some  or all  the
                      informant's   factual   statements   were
                      corroborated   wherever  reasonable   and
                      practicable    (e.g.,   through    police
                      surveillance);   and   whether   a   law-
                      enforcement     affiant    included     a
                      professional  assessment of  the probable
                      significance  of the facts related by the
                      informant,   based   on   experience   or
                      expertise.    None  of  these  factors is
                      indispensable; thus, stronger evidence on
                      one or more factors  may compensate for a
                      weaker or deficient showing on another. 

            Zayas-Diaz, 95 F.3d at  111 (citations and footnote omitted).
            __________

                      The risk that  the informant is  lying or in  error

            need not be  wholly eliminated.   Rather, what  is needed  is

            that "the probability  of a lying or  inaccurate informer has

                                         -9-
                                          9

            been   sufficiently  reduced   by  corroborative   facts  and

            observations."  2  W. LaFave, Search and Seizure:  A Treatise
                                          _______________________________

            on  the  Fourth  Amendment   168  (3d  ed.  1996)  ("LaFave")
            __________________________

            (quotation omitted).  The  judgment to be made is:  when does

            verification  of  part  of  the  informant's  story  make  it

            sufficiently likely that the  crucial part of the informant's

            story (i.e., allegations that  criminal activity has occurred

            and  that evidence pertaining  thereto will  be found  in the

            location to be searched)  is true, such as would  "'warrant a

            [person] of reasonable caution in the  belief' that [a search

            would  be] appropriate,"  based upon  what the  informant has

            said?  See Terry, 391 U.S. at 21-22.
                   ___ _____

                      In   analyzing   whether   there    is   sufficient

            corroboration, in verifying the  reliability of the informant

            or in  demonstrating an adequate  basis for knowledge,  it is

            not particularly probative  for the informant to supply a lot

            of  details about  irrelevant facts  that other  people could

            easily  know about  and that  are not incriminating,  such as

            describing  all   the  furniture  in  an   apartment  or  the

            defendant's  routine   activities.    Such  details   do  not

            demonstrate  that the  informant has  a legitimate  basis for

            knowing  about  the defendant's  allegedly  criminal activity

            which,  after all, is what the affidavit must establish.  "At

            best, [such] details merit  the conclusion that the informant

            has   been  in  the  premises   in  question  [or  knows  the

                                         -10-
                                          10

            defendant's daily  routine], but since a  direct statement to

            that effect  by the informant would not carry the day, it can

            hardly be  enough that this particular  conclusion is reached

            by inference from the statement of detail."  2 LaFave  at 160

            (footnote omitted).  Unless such details, combined with other

            circumstances,  would in  some  way  generate suspicion  that

            criminal conduct has occurred  or that contraband or evidence

            exists on the premises  or on the person to be searched, they

            would not warrant a prudent police officer in the belief that

            a search would  be appropriate.   Cf. Alabama  v. White,  496
                                              ___ _________________

            U.S.  325, 332 (1990)  (where anonymous caller  told police a

            woman  would   leave  a  certain  apartment   building  at  a

            particular time and get into a particularly described car and

            drive  to a  certain  motel, and  where surveilling  officers

            observed such behavior, these facts constitute a "close case"

            to  establish merely  reasonable  suspicion to  make a  Terry
                                                                    _____

            stop).

                      In the instant  case, the defendant  challenges two

            distinct  aspects  of the  search:   whether  the  police had

            probable cause to  obtain a warrant to search  the apartment;

            and  whether  the  police  were justified  in  searching  the

            defendant  when  they did.   We  will  analyze each  of these

            aspects separately.   We conclude that the  warrant was based

            upon sufficient  facts to establish probable  cause to search

            the premises; then when  that search was executed, additional

                                         -11-
                                          11

            information came  to light  which provided probable  cause to

            search the person of the defendant.

                      The  government  argues   that  a  controlled  buy,

            observed by the  officer, is per  se sufficient to  establish
                                         _______

            probable cause to  search the apartment.  We disagree.  A per
                                                                      ___

            se  rule is  not  appropriate in  the  context of  protecting
            __

            precious Fourth Amendment freedoms.   Fourth Amendment rights

            "are not mere second-class rights  but belong in the  catalog

            of indispensable  freedoms.   Among  deprivations of  rights,

            none is so  effective in  cowing a  population, crushing  the

            spirit of the  individual and putting terror in  every heart.

            Uncontrolled  search and seizure is one of the first and most

            effective  weapons   in  the   arsenal  of   every  arbitrary

            government."   Brinegar v. United  States, 338 U.S.  160, 180
                           __________________________

            (1949)  (Jackson, J.,  dissenting).   "But  the  right to  be

            secure  against  searches and  seizures  is one  of  the most

            difficult to protect.  Since the officers  are themselves the

            chief invaders, there is no enforcement outside of court. . .

            .  Courts  can protect  the innocent  against such  invasions

            only indirectly and through  the medium of excluding evidence

            obtained against those who  frequently are guilty."    Id. at
                                                                   ___

            181.  As Justice Scalia has  written for the Court, "there is

            nothing   new  in  the   realization  that  the  Constitution

            sometimes  insulates the  criminality  of a  few in  order to

            protect the privacy of us all."  Hicks, 480 U.S. at 329.
                                             _____

                                         -12-
                                          12

                      Moreover,   a   probable  cause   determination  is

            fundamentally  a  fact-specific  inquiry.    No   one  factor

            possesses talismanic  powers.   Because of the  importance of

            Fourth Amendment  freedoms to every American,  and because of

            the fact-specific  nature of  the probable cause  inquiry, we

            reject  the government's  contention  that  a controlled  buy

            should  be per se sufficient  to establish probable  cause.  
                       ______

            See United States  v. Caggiano,  899 F.2d 99,  102 (1st  Cir.
            ___ __________________________

            1990) (a  determination of probable cause "cannot be based on

            hard  certainties   and  rigid  rules");   cf.  Richards   v.
                                                       ___  _____________

            Wisconsin, 117 S. Ct.  1416, 1421 (1997) (rejecting a  per se
            _________                                              ______

            exception  to   the  knock-and-announce  element   of  Fourth

            Amendment's  reasonableness  requirement   for  felony   drug

            investigations).   We hold  instead that  every case  must be

            evaluated  "on  its  own  facts and  circumstances,"  Ker  v.
                                                                  _______

            California, 374 U.S. 23,  33 (1963) (internal quotation marks
            __________

            omitted), with due consideration to  the totality of all  the

            circumstances  in that  particular case,  Gates, 462  U.S. at
                                                      _____

            238.  See also Ornelas, 116 S. Ct. at 1661.  "[T]he fact that
                  ________ _______

            [a  controlled  buy]  may  frequently  present  circumstances

            warranting [a  finding of probable cause]  cannot remove from

            the neutral scrutiny of [a magistrate and] a reviewing  court

            the  [existence  of probable  cause]  in  a particular  case.

            Instead, in each case, it  is the duty of a  court confronted

            with  the  question  to   determine  whether  the  facts  and

                                         -13-
                                          13

            circumstances of  the particular  [affidavit in support  of a

            warrant application] justified" the issuance of  the warrant.

            Richards,  117 S.  Ct. at  1421.   Accordingly, we  hold that
            ________

            magistrates  and reviewing courts must carefully review every

            warrant application  on its  own merit, to  determine whether

            all  the facts and circumstances of  that case are sufficient

            to establish probable cause to conduct a search.

                      We do agree, however, that, taking into account the

            totality of circumstances in the instant case, the government

            had established probable  cause for the  search of the  first

            floor rear apartment at 676-678 Chalkstone Avenue.  According

            to the officer's  affidavit, the informant had  told him that

            he knew "Fat Boy" and "Turtle" were storing and selling drugs

            in the  apartment in question;  the informant had  offered to

            make  a purchase  from  those individuals  in that  apartment

            (knowing  that,  if  he was  lying,  he  would  be found  out

            relatively  quickly); and the  informant in fact  went to the

            apartment without  crack cocaine,  after  having been  patted

            down,  and   emerged  several   minutes  later  with   crack,

            explaining that he  had purchased the crack from  "Fat Boy."2

            While all  these facts  did not  corroborate each  other with

            certainty, the combination of  facts "'reduced the chances of

            a reckless  or prevaricating tale,' [and]  thus provid[ed] 'a

                                
            ____________________

            2.  The complaint  contained additional facts  but those were
            not part of the affidavit.  See infra at 20 & n.4.
                                        ___ _____

                                         -14-
                                          14

            substantial basis  for crediting  the hearsay.'"   Gates, 468
                                                               _____

            U.S. at 244-45 (quoting Jones v. United States, 362 U.S. 257,
                                    ______________________

            269,  271   (1960)).    Taken  together,   these  facts  were

            sufficient to give the  magistrate a "substantial basis" upon

            which to  conclude that  there was  a "fair  probability that

            contraband  or evidence of a  crime [would] be  found" in the

            apartment.  See Gates, 462 U.S. at 238-39. 
                        ___ _____

                      This  case  contains  almost  the exact  same  fact

            pattern as in  United States  v. Garcia, 983  F.2d 1160  (1st
                           ________________________

            Cir. 1993).  In  Garcia, the defendant had moved  to suppress
                             ______

            evidence seized during the search of an apartment in a three-

            family building, on the  ground that the affidavit underlying

            the search  warrant upon which the search  team relied failed

            to demonstrate probable cause for the search.

                      That affidavit, in essence, stated:  that
                      [the  affiant,  a  police detective]  had
                      reason to believe that a large-scale drug
                      operation was being  conducted out of the
                      second floor apartment of  93-95 Gallatin
                      Street;  that  he  met  with  a  reliable
                      confidential informant who told  him that
                      two  Hispanic  persons  were storing  and
                      selling  drugs;  that  the informant  had
                      seen  large  amounts  of cocaine  in  the
                      apartment; and that, to  corroborate this
                      information,  [the detective]  executed a
                      "controlled  buy" through  the informant.
                      The   affidavit   fully   described   the
                      "controlled buy." 

            Id. at 1166.  In Garcia, as here, the controlled buy was less
            ___              ______

            than  ideal:  the detective  was able to  watch the informant

            enter  and leave the building through its front door, but did

                                         -15-
                                          15

            not  follow  the informant  into  the building  and  thus was

            unable  to  verify with  certainty  which  apartment was  the

            source  of  the drugs  (or even  whether  the drugs  had been

            secreted  elsewhere in  the  building, as  the defendant  had

            hypothesized).  Id.  at 1166-67.  In  addition, Garcia shared
                            ___                             ______

            another anomaly  with the instant  case:  when  the informant

            handed  the drugs  to the  officer, he  reported that  he had

            purchased the  drugs from  "the Hispanic male  [singular] who

            resided  in  the second  floor  apartment,"  even though  the

            informant  had  previously  told  him  that  there  were  two

            Hispanic persons involved in the drug-selling operation.  Id.
                                                                      ___

            at 1167.

                      We  found that  the state  court judge  issuing the

            warrant  and   the  district  judge  reviewing   it  "drew  a

            reasonable inference  of probable  cause that there  was drug

            trafficking in  the second floor apartment  of 93-95 Gallatin

            Street."  Id.   Likewise, in the instant case,  the affidavit
                      ___

            contained  sufficient information to lead a reasonable person

            to  believe that crack cocaine  was being stored  in and sold

            from  the first  floor rear  apartment at  676-678 Chalkstone

            Avenue, also a three-story tenement building.

                      The  present case  is  controlled by  Garcia   even
                                                            ______

            though  the  affidavit  there  contained one  fact  that  the

            present affidavit did not:  the detective in Garcia described
                                                         ______

            the informant as "reliable."  This is a distinction without a

                                         -16-
                                          16

            real difference.   A bald assertion  of reliability, with  no

            allegations regarding the basis for the officer's belief that

            the informant is reliable --  such as convictions obtained as

            a result of information supplied in the past by the informant

            -- is "entitled  to only  slight weight."   United States  v.
                                                        _________________

            Foree,  43  F.3d  1572,   1576  (11th  Cir.  1995)  (internal
            _____

            quotation marks  omitted); see  Gates, 462  U.S. at 239  ("An
                                       ___  _____

            officer's statement  that  'affiants have  received  reliable

            information  from  a credible  person  and  do believe'  that

            heroin  is stored in a home, is likewise inadequate.").  Even

            though the informant's past  performance may be considered in

            evaluating the credibility or reliability of the informant, a

            mere  allegation   that  the   informant  is   "credible"  or

            "reliable"  does not  permit the  judicial officer  to assume

            that any  such past performance  actually took place  or that

            the   performance  was   of  a   nature  to   merit   such  a

            characterization of the informant. 

                      Thus, it  is of only "slight" moment that this case

            lacks  the  conclusory  assertion  of  reliability  that  was

            present  in  Garcia.    The  more  important  facts  are  the
                         ______

            similarities between the two cases:  an informant who alleges

            that  drugs  are  being  stored  and  sold  in  a  particular

            apartment, who offered to  make a controlled buy and  who did

            make  a  controlled  buy  from  the  same  apartment.     The

            corroboration of the informant's story did not consist merely

                                         -17-
                                          17

            of  corroborating  some innocent  facts  that  any number  of

            people  might  know.   This  was  corroboration  of the  very

            criminal activity which the police were investigating, and of

            the existence of contraband or evidence on the premises to be

            searched.  As such,  it supports a finding of  probable cause

            in  a way that facts about furniture or routine activities do

            not.

                      To be sure, the controlled buy in this case was, as

            the defendant claims, not  free of problems.  Compare  United
                                                          _______  ______

            States  v.  Cruz  Jimenez, 894  F.2d  1,  3  (1st Cir.  1990)
            _________________________

            (informant, searched  first,  had  cocaine  when  she  exited

            defendant's motel room; that, plus what police overheard from

            body recorder she wore during transaction, confirmed that she

            obtained drugs from defendant).  But as noted, in Garcia, 983
                                                              ______

            F.2d  at 1166-67,  we upheld  a probable  cause determination

            where   the  facts,  including   the  imperfections   of  the

            controlled buy, were remarkably similar to those here.3

                                
            ____________________

            3.  The government  contends that, even if  the affidavit did
            not  contain sufficient  corroboration to  establish probable
            cause to  search, suppression  is not appropriate  because of
            the  Leon good faith exception.   See United  States v. Leon,
                 ____                         ___ ______________________
            468 U.S. 897 (1984).  "This good faith exception, however, is
            grounded in an  objective standard of  reasonableness.  As  a
            result,  an  officer  is   required  to  have  a  'reasonable
            knowledge of  what  the law  prohibits.'"   United States  v.
                                                        _________________
            Fuccillo,  808 F.2d  173, 177 (1st  Cir.), cert.  denied, 482
            ________                                   _____________
            U.S.  905 (1987)  (quoting  Leon,  468  U.S.  at  920  n.20).
                                        ____
            "Suppression  is   still  an  appropriate  remedy  when  'the
            officers  were . . . reckless in preparing their affidavit. .
            . .'"   Fuccillo, 808 F.2d at 178 (quoting  Leon, 468 U.S. at
                    ________                            ____
            926).   In Fuccillo, we held that the officers "were reckless
                       ________
            in not including in the affidavit information which was known

                                         -18-
                                          18

                      The   defendant  further  argues  that  the  search

            warrant was  inadequate because of a  few minor discrepancies

            or errors in some facts in the affidavit and in the officer's

            testimony  about the  name of  the street  from which  he was

            conducting  surveillance  during  the  controlled  buy.    We

            disagree.  The  magistrate "may  reasonably choose to  . .  .

            disregard petty inconsistencies"  in informants'  statements.

            Schaefer,  87 F.3d at 567  (quoted in Zayas-Diaz,  95 F.3d at
            ________                              __________

            115-16).

                      We  turn  now to  the  defendant's  claim that  the

            affidavit  contained  insufficient  information  to  form the

            basis  for  probable  cause  to search  the  person  of  this
                                                         ______

            defendant.   This is a  separate issue from  the existence of

            probable cause to search the premises which we have discussed

            supra.   Probable cause to search a person "must be supported
            _____

            by  probable  cause  particularized  with  respect   to  that

            person."   Ybarra v. Illinois, 444 U.S. 85, 91 (1979); United
                       __________________                          ______

            States  v. Sepulveda,  102 F.3d  1313, 1315 (1st  Cir. 1996).
            ____________________

            "[A]   person's  mere  propinquity  to  others  independently

            suspected of  criminal activity does not,  without more, give

                                
            ____________________

            or  easily accessible  to them."    Id. at  178.   There, the
                                                ___
            officers  "simply  did  not   'take  every  step  that  could
            reasonably be expected of them.'"  Id. (quoting Massachusetts
                                               ___          _____________
            v. Sheppard,  468 U.S. 981, 989 (1984)).  In this case, it is
            ___________
            an   open  question  whether   this  objective   standard  of
            reasonableness was  met.  We  need not  reach this  question,
            however, since  we determine  the evidence is  admissible, in
            any event, on other grounds.

                                         -19-
                                          19

            rise to probable cause  to search that person."   Ybarra, 444
                                                              ______

            U.S.  at  91;  Sepulveda, 102  F.3d  at  1315.   The  factors
                           _________

            discussed supra,  while providing probable  cause to  believe
                      _____

            that  the  premises contained  contraband  or  evidence of  a
                       ________

            crime, do not alone provide a sufficient basis for the police

            to have searched this defendant's person (on which they found

            his identification which,  coupled with the gas bill they had

            found in the apartment, tied him to the premises).  

                      The  government argues  that  the "specificity  and

            detail"  of the  informant's  descriptions of  "Fat Boy"  and

            "Turtle"    are   so   "precise"   that   they   are   "self-

            authenticating,"  an  additional  factor that  would  support

            issuing a  warrant to  search  the person  of this  defendant

            (citing Zayas-Diaz,  95 F.3d at  111).   We disagree.   It is
                    __________

            true that there may be cases where an informant provides such

            a  wealth of detail, with  such a high  degree of specificity

            that  it is unlikely  that the  informant is  inventing these

            assertions, and  his veracity  is supported through  the very

            specificity and detail  of his  statement.   See id.;  United
                                                         ___ ___   ______

            States v. Caggiano, 899 F.2d 99, 102-03 (1st  Cir. 1990).  In
            __________________

            the instant  case, however, the so-called  "precision" in the

            affidavit -- "'Turtle' Alias John Doe.   5'7" 130 Lbs." -- is

            not  nearly enough  to make  the informant's  statement self-

            authenticating.    This  is  true  even  if  we   accept  the

            government's  invitation to  consider as well  the additional

                                         -20-
                                          20

            assertions  contained  in  the  complaint   attached  to  the

            affidavit:   that "Turtle" was an Asian male with black short

            hair.4 

                      Nor does the  controlled buy in  this case offer  a

            corroborative  cure for  the affidavit's  deficiencies.   The

            controlled  buy --  during  which the  informant said  he had

            bought drugs from "Fat  Boy," not from this defendant  -- was

            sufficient to cure the  lack of probable cause to  search the

            premises but  was inadequate  to cure  the  lack of  probable
            ________

            cause  to  believe that  a search  of the  defendant's person
                                                       __________________

            would likely turn up contraband or evidence of a crime.

                      Nevertheless,   once   the  officers   entered  the

            apartment legally  pursuant to  the legal search  warrant for

            the   premises,   they   observed   two   men   fleeing   who

            (approximately)  fit  those admittedly  sketchy descriptions.

            This flight, coupled with the controlled buy monitored by the

            detective  and the informant's  description (including height

            and weight) of two alleged drug traffickers selling drugs out
                           ___

                                
            ____________________

            4.  The  latter details  were not included  in the  affidavit
            itself,  and "[t]he  issuing magistrate  ordinarily considers
            only   the  facts   set   forth   in  supporting   affidavits
            accompanying the  warrant application."   Zayas-Diaz, 95 F.3d
                                                      __________
            at  111.  The  magistrate may  also consider  testimony given
            before  him or her, if the testimony  was sworn to and made a
            part of the affidavit.  See Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(c).  We  need
                                    ___
            not decide whether the  complaint accompanying the  affidavit
            in this case should  be considered as part of  the affidavit,
            because we hold infra  that the police had probable  cause to
                            _____
            search  the defendant's  person  regardless of  how we  would
            decide this issue.

                                         -21-
                                          21

            of that apartment, was sufficient to establish probable cause

            to  search the defendant's person, without a warrant.5  Thus,

            even  though  the affidavit  was  insufficient  to sustain  a

            warrant to search the person of this defendant, the affidavit

            was sufficient to sustain a  warrant to search the apartment,

            and  once  the  police  entered the  apartment  legally,  the

            defendant's suspicious behavior (coupled with the informant's

            report and  the controlled  buy) was sufficient  to establish

            probable  cause to  search  the defendant  for contraband  or

            evidence of a crime.

                                      Conclusion
                                      Conclusion
                                      __________

                      We  cannot  say  that  the  affidavit  here  lacked

            probable cause sufficient  to justify a  search of the  first

            floor   rear   apartment   at   676-678   Chalkstone  Avenue.

            Nevertheless,  we urge  police officers  to include  in their

            affidavits as much  information as they can legally gather on

            which  to base  a finding  of reliability  and basis  for the

            informant's knowledge.   And we will  require magistrates and

            reviewing courts  to scrutinize  affidavits such as  this one

            carefully.  

                                
            ____________________

            5.  The warrantless  aspect of the search of  the defendant's
            person was  justified by exigent circumstances  in this case:
            two individuals  who met an informant's  descriptions of drug
            dealers fled from  police officers as they  executed a search
            warrant, during the investigation  of a crime involving drugs
            that  could easily be disposed  of.  See  McCabe v. Life-Line
                                                 ___  ___________________
            Ambulance Serv.,  77 F.3d  540, 545 (1st  Cir. 1996);  United
            _______________                                        ______
            States v. Wihbey, 75 F.3d 761, 766 (1st Cir. 1996).
            ________________

                                         -22-
                                          22

                      As we said in  the context of Rule 11,  "[t]he more

            meticulously  [a legal rule] is adhered to, the more it tends

            to  discourage,  or  at  least  to  enable  more  expeditious

            disposition of"  a defendant's attacks on asserted violations

            of the  rule.   United States  v. Martinez-Martinez,  69 F.3d
                            ___________________________________

            1215,  1225-26 (1st Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 1343
                                            ____________

            (1996)  (quoting United States v.  Cotal-Crespo, 47 F.3d 1, 8
                             ______________________________

            (1st  Cir.),  cert. denied,  116 S.  Ct.  94 (1995),  in turn
                          ____________

            quoting McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459, 465 (1969)).
                    _________________________

            Therefore, "[a]lthough  we conclude that  the [probable cause

            determination] in this case was adequate, we are nevertheless

            compelled  to   remind  district   courts  [and  police   and

            magistrates]  that,  for the  sake  of  judicial economy  and

            fundamental fairness, the best way to ensure that" the Fourth

            Amendment's probable cause requirement is complied with is to

            meticulously comply  with it.  Martinez-Martinez,  69 F.3d at
                                           _________________

            1225-26 (quoting  Cotal-Crespo, 47 F.3d at  8); see Richards,
                              ____________                  ___ ________

            117  S.  Ct. at  1421 (emphasizing  importance   of   neutral

            scrutiny  of  police  behavior by  a 

                                         -23-
                                          23

            reviewing court to ensure compliance with Fourth Amendment in

            particular case).

                                          Affirmed.
                                          Affirmed.
                                          ________

                                         -24-
                                          24