Commonwealth v. Santiago
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the CourtKantrowitz, J.
The motion judge ruled that a search warrant application failed to establish the requisite nexus between the objects sought and the location to be searched in that neither the *516confidential informant nor the police had actually seen any “proceeds, ledgers, and records.” The Commonwealth appeals. We reverse.1
Background. On October 2, 2003, the New Bedford police simultaneously executed three search warrants2 as part of an investigation into the defendant’s large-scale drug operation.3 The search warrants were issued based upon the affidavits of Detective Michael Carrier, a member of the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States v. VentrescaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Commonwealth v. UptonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
- Commonwealth v. JimenezMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2002
- Commonwealth v. O'DayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2003
- Commonwealth v. BlakeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Commonwealth v. LuthyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2007
- Commonwealth v. GallagherMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2007
- Commonwealth v. RodriguezMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2009
- Commonwealth v. LimaMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2011
- Commonwealth v. TurnerMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2008
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.