Commonwealth v. Steven Clark, 34 EAP 2010 (Pa. 2011)

In 2004, a confidential informant told a veteran Philadelphia narcotics officer that a person he knew as “Steve” was packaging cocaine out of his house at 4242 Salmon Street in Philadelphia. The police conducted a controlled buy that confirmed this information, and filed an application for a warrant in which they described the informant as “reliable” but gave no information as to his history with the police or his basis of knowledge in this case.

The warrant was issued and the police found contraband inside the house. Steven Clark, the defendant, was arrested but, at suppression, the trial court found the warrant to be defective because the affidavit of probable cause did not explain the informant’s reliability, or his basis of knowledge. The Superior Court affirmed, and the Commonwealth petitioned for allocatur.

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania disagreed with the trial and Superior Courts. It reiterated the totality of the circumstances standard, and stressed that the controlled buy was strong evidence of the informant’s reliability. On this basis, it held that the affidavit was sufficient, the warrant valid, and remanded the matter for trial.