RITCHIE V. COM.
CRIMINAL: SEARCH WARRANT
2006-CA-000860
PUBLISHED: AFFIRMING; BUCKINGHAM PRESIDING JUDGE WITH LAMBERT CONCURRING AND STUMBO DISSENTING BY SEPARATE OPINION
McCRACKEN CIRCUIT COURT
DATE RENDERED: 5/11/2007
CA affirmed TC’s order denying Ritchie’s motion to suppress evidence seized following the execution of a search warrant. The evidence seized from the "trash pull" by itself was sufficient to constitute probable cause to support the issuance of the search warrant. CA rejected arguments by Ritchie that probable cause was lacking because the affidavit neither specified the year in which the information was received nor specified how or where Ritchie was involved in selling illegal drugs. According to Ritchie, even if the anonymous tip was received in August of 2004 and a "trash pull" was conducted on November 15, the three-month delay renders the search invalid as not contemporaneous with the tip. CA rejected the argument and held the TC did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to suppress. Further, CA rejected Ritchie’s argument that the evidence should have been suppressed on grounds that the warrant was procured by deliberate falsehood or a reckless disregard for the truth.
Note: This opinion marks the return of Judge Janet Stumbo in the familiar position of lone dissenter.
Digested by Scott Byrd
www.olginandbyrd.com
