State v. Watkins
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HOWARD, Judge.
This is an appeal from an order granting a motion to suppress. The issue is whether the information supplied by confidential informants was sufficiently corroborated by the independent observations of the arresting officer so as to meet the standards of probable cause set forth in Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108, 84 S.Ct. 1509, 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964) and Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410, 89 S.Ct. 584, 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969). We conclude that it was and the motion to suppress should not have been granted.
On January 25, 1978, Tucson Police Officers William Hurguy and…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Carroll v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Aguilar v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Spinelli v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Draper v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- United States v. Domingo S. Canieso and Siu Tsien ChouCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1972
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. HaddCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1980
- State v. WhiteCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1979
- State v. TurneyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1982
- State v. EasonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1979
- State v. EasonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1979
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.