IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-50184
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
DARYL RUFFIN,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. SA-99-CR-478-ALL
--------------------
December 3, 2001
Before DeMOSS, PARKER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Daryl Ruffin challenges the denial of his motion to suppress
evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant. He pleaded guilty
to possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, but preserved
his right to appeal the denial of his suppression motion.
In reviewing the denial of a motion to suppress evidence
obtained pursuant to a search warrant, we determine: (1) whether
the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule applies; and
(2) if not, whether probable cause supported the warrant. United
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 01-50184
-2-
States v. Cherna, 184 F.3d 403, 407 (5th Cir. 1999), cert.
denied, 529 U.S. 1065 (2000).
Ruffin contends the good-faith exception does not apply
because the affidavit on which the search warrant was based was
merely a "bare bones" affidavit. The affidavit was based on a
confidential informant’s personal observation of Ruffin in
possession of cocaine at the subject premises within the previous
24 hours. The affidavit stated that Ruffin usually hid the drugs
in his back yard, protected by large dogs. Furthermore, the
confidential informant had previously provided reliable and
credible information regarding the trafficking in controlled
substances. Thus, the officers relied in good faith on the
warrant. See United States v. McKnight, 953 F.2d 898, 905 (5th
Cir. 1992); United States v. Satterwhite, 980 F.2d 317, 320 (5th
Cir. 1992).
AFFIRMED.