United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
June 2, 2003
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 02-20185
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MILTON EARL CARBE,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-01-CR-337-ALL
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Milton Earl Carbe has appealed his convictions for conspiracy
to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and possession with
intent to distribute cocaine. He contends that the district court
should have suppressed evidence obtained pursuant to a search
warrant because the warrant was supported by a facially invalid
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
affidavit. We review this question de novo.1
Under the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule,
“[e]vidence obtained by officers in objectively reasonable good-
faith reliance upon a search warrant is admissible, even though the
affidavit on which the warrant was based was insufficient to
establish probable cause.”2 Officers may rely in good faith upon
the validity of a warrant “so long as the warrant is supported by
more than a ‘bare bones affidavit.’”3 An affidavit is bare bones
if “it so deficient in demonstrating probable cause that it renders
an officer’s belief in its existence completely unreasonable.”4
The affidavit in this case was based on the hearsay statements
of a confidential informant. “An affidavit may rely on hearsay –
information not within the personal knowledge of the affiant, such
as an informant’s statement – as long as the affidavit presents a
substantial basis for crediting the hearsay.”5 In considering
whether an informant’s tip is credible, we examine the informant’s
1
United States v. Cavazos, 288 F.3d 706, 709 (5th Cir.),
cert. denied, 123 S. Ct. 253 (2002).
2
United States v. Cisneros, 112 F.3d 1272, 1278 (5th Cir.
1997) (internal quotation marks omitted).
3
Id. (internal quotation marks omitted).
4
Id.
5
See United States v. Laury, 985 F.2d 1293, 1312 (5th Cir.
1993).
-2-
veracity and basis of knowledge.6 The officer’s statements in an
affidavit that the informant previously provided reliable
information sufficiently established the informant’s veracity.7
Similarly, the factual detail in the affidavit sufficiently
demonstrated the informant’s basis of knowledge.8 The affidavit
was thus not “so deficient in demonstrating probable cause” that it
rendered the officers’ belief in the existence of probable cause
“completely unreasonable.”9
AFFIRMED.
6
Id.
7
Id.
8
Id.
9
Cisneros, 112 F.3d at 1278.
-3-