State Of Louisiana v. Earl James Lingo

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 2025 KW 0588
VERSUS

BARL JAMES LINGO JULY 31, 2025
In Re: State of Louisiana, applying for supervisory writs, 22nd

Judicial District Court, Parish of St. Tammany, Nos.
O151-F-2024, 0152-F-2024, 0153-F-2024.

BEFORE : THERIOT, PENZATO, AND BALFOUR, JJ.

WRIT GRANTED. Probable cause sufficient to issue a search
warrant exists when the facts and circumstances within the
affiant’s knowledge and of which he has reasonably trustworthy
information, are sufficient to support a reasonable belief that an
offense has been committed and that evidence or contraband may be
found at the place to be searched. State v. Johnson, 408 So.2d
1280 (La. 1982). This determination rests on whether the totality
of the circumstances forms a substantial basis for a finding of
probable cause. State v. Green, 2002-1022 (La. 12/4/02), 831 So.2d
962, 969. Further, the facts establishing the existence of
probable cause for the warrant must be contained within the four
corners of the affidavit. Green, 831 So.2d at 969. Here, the
facts included in the affidavit submitted in support of the request
for the search warrant show that in addition to the faint odor of
burnt marijuana in various locations on the exterior of the mobile
home residence, there was a previous complaint of possible illicit
narcotics activities at the mobile home, several surveillance
cameras were located around the exterior of the mobile home that
appeared to be in working order, a Cake brand THC smoking device
was observed inside one of the six vehicles on the property, the
interior of the mobile home smelled of burnt marijuana, and the
defendant advised he had approximately sixty firearms inside the
mobile home. Under the totality of the circumstances, there were
sufficient facts set forth in the affidavit of probable cause to
issue the search warrant without the inclusion of any facts gleaned
from the warrantless protective sweep. Accordingly, the district
court’s ruling granting the motion to suppress is reversed, and
this case is remanded to the district court for further
proceedings.

AOVRT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

OURT
FOR THE COURT

DE