Can a police search warrant be used to suppress or suppress evidence obtained from a probationer's home by the police?

We recognize law enforcement has a legitimate interest in conducting probation searches to monitor compliance with probation terms, regardless of whether the police have reason to believe the probationer is actually in violation of those terms, and we further recognize that the intrusion on appellant's privacy rights was minimal. However, in our view, these factors did not justify the intrusion on appellant's Fourth Amendment protected interests that occurred here by virtue of the detention, in the absence of any articulable facts (1) from which it could be inferred that the police had reason to believe the probationer might be in violation of probation or the detention was necessary to obtain from appellant information that would establish a probation violation, or (2) that in some other way gave rise to a reasonable suspicion that some criminal activity was afoot. Thus, the detention was unlawful, and the incriminating evidence obtained by the officers, including the contraband found in the house and appellant's statements to police, should have been suppressed as the products of the unlawful detention. (United States v. Crews (1980) 445 U.S. 463, 470.) The trial court therefore erred in denying appellant's suppression motion.⁶

Page 13