California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Galland, G034189 (Cal. App. 11/4/2009), G034189 (Cal. App. 2009):
True, the court did not specifically report out that there were grounds for keeping the informant's identity confidential, that it was necessary to seal the affidavit in order to avoid revealing the identity of the informant, that under the totality of the circumstances there was a fair probability that evidence of a crime would be discovered in the place searched pursuant to the warrant, or that defendant's allegations of material misrepresentations or omissions were unsupported. (Galland III, supra, 45 Cal.4th at p. 364; Hobbs, supra, 7 Cal.4th at pp. 974-975 [court should report conclusions to defendant].) However, we imply all findings necessary to support the judgment and determine whether substantial evidence supports the implied findings. (People v. Francis (2002) 98 Cal.App.4th 873, 877-878.) In this case, substantial evidence supports an implied finding on each of the enumerated points.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.