Commonwealth v. Clark

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 16, 2010

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 2010-06-16

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently October 2011

3 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“Where the police conduct a successful controlled drug buy based on information supplied by a confidential informant, and recount the information and the conduct of the controlled buy in an affidavit of probable cause to obtain a search warrant, is probable cause lacking because the affidavit does not allege the basis of the confidential informant’s knowledge and does not contain the “customary” phrase that the informant “has provided information that in the past has resulted in arrests or convictions?””

quoted by 1 later decision, including Commonwealth v. Clark

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2010-06-16

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2AND NOW, this 16th day of June, 2010, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, rephrased for clarity, is:

Where the police conduct a successful controlled drug buy based on information supplied by a confidential informant, and recount the information and the conduct of the controlled buy in an affidavit of probable cause to obtain a search warrant, is probable cause lacking because the affidavit does not allege the basis of the confidential informant’s knowledge and does not contain the “customary” phrase that the informant “has provided information that in the past has resulted in arrests or convictions?”