Wamble v. State
Decision Date | 23 August 1991 |
Docket Number | CR-89-459 |
Citation | 593 So.2d 109 |
Parties | Gary WAMBLE v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Stephen T. Etheredge, Dothan, for appellant.
James H. Evans, Atty. Gen., and Cecil Brendle, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
The appellant, Gary Wamble, was convicted of arson in the second degree, a violation of § 13A-7-42, Code of Alabama 1975, and was sentenced to 15 years in the penitentiary. On appeal, he alleges that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence seized as a result of a search warrant which he claims was issued without probable cause.
The appellant relies on Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108, 84 S.Ct. 1509, 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964), and maintains that the search warrant was based on nothing more than a mere "bare bones" affidavit and was, therefore, insufficient to support a finding of probable cause. The search warrant reads in pertinent part as follows:
In seeking the warrant, Deputy Sheriff Michael Jones informed the issuing judge that several household items were missing from the burned residence and that all of these items, with the exception of two gallon jars filled with pennies, had been recovered from a "gully" which served as a trash dump for several families. He also informed the judge that several documents bearing the appellant's name were recovered from this same gully. At this meeting, the judge was also informed that the appellant lived next door to the burned house and that he was known to be extremely upset due to serious marital difficulties on the date of the arson.
An issuing judge's determination that sufficient probable cause existed to support the warrant is "entitled to great deference and is conclusive in the absence of arbitrariness." United States v. Pike, 523 F.2d 734 (5th Cir.1975), reh'g denied, 525 F.2d 1407, cert. denied, 426 U.S. 906, 96 S.Ct. 2226, 48 L.Ed.2d 830 (1976). When reviewing a lower court's decision to issue a search warrant, this court looks to the totality of the information available to the issuing judge and does not restrict its review to the "four corners" of the affidavit. United States v. Character, 568 F.2d 442 (5th Cir.1978). Furthermore, the correct standard of review is whether the issuing judge had a "substantial basis" for concluding that probable cause existed. Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 238, 103 S.Ct. 2317, 2332, 76 L.Ed.2d 527 (1983). Even in cases where the affidavit on its face is insufficient to support a finding of probable cause, oral testimony...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Powell v. State
...existed to support the warrant "is entitled to great deference and is conclusive in the absence of arbitrariness."' Wamble v. State, 593 So.2d 109, 110 (Ala.Cr.App.1991), citing United States v. Pike, 523 F.2d 734 (5th Cir.1975), reh'g denied, 525 F.2d 1407, cert. denied, 426 U.S. 906, 96 S......
-
DeBruce v. State
...2 W. LaFave § 4.6(a) at 238. Here, the description of the things to be seized was constitutionally sufficient. See Wamble v. State, 593 So.2d 109, 110 (Ala.Cr.App.1991). IV. The record does not support any finding that the veniremembers discussed the merits of the case in violation of the i......
-
Snyder v. State
...734 (5th Cir.1975), reh'g denied, 525 F.2d 1407, cert. denied, 426 U.S. 906, 96 S.Ct. 2226, 48 L.Ed.2d 830 (1976).' "Wamble v. State, 593 So.2d 109, 110 (Ala.Crim.App.1991)." Drake v. State, 668 So.2d 877, 879-80 "`Probable cause deals with probabilities, not legal technicalities. It is gro......
-
Simmons v. State
..."four corners" of the affidavit. United States v. Character, 568 F.2d 442 (5th Cir. 1978).'" 717 So.2d at 44, quoting Wamble v. State, 593 So.2d 109, 110 (Ala.Cr.App.1991). In this case, Detective Vincent Cunningham, the affiant, stated in the affidavit for the search "I, Detective Vincent ......