Hernandez

This case illustrates that there are limits to the “good faith exception” to the exclusionary rule announced by the United States Supreme Court in United States v. Leon (1984) 468 U.S. 897 [ 82 L.Ed.2d 677 , 104 S.Ct. 3405 ]). Paraphrasing Mr. Justice White, the name “Leon” is not a mere talisman in whose presence the exclusionary rule inexorably fades away and disappears. (Cf. Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1971) 403 U.S. 443 461 [ 29 L.Ed.2d 564, 580 , 91 S.Ct. 2022 ].)

Jose Isabel Samudio Hernandez appeals from the judgment entered following a court trial that resulted in his conviction of possessing more than 14.25 grams of a substance containing heroin for sale. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351; Pen. Code, § 1203.07, subd. (a).) He meritoriously contends the search warrant lacked probable cause for the search of the residence at 610 Orange Drive and that the good faith rule does not prevent exclusion of the evidence seized pursuant thereto.

In January 1993, two informants reported that a man known as Chávelo was selling large quantities of heroin and cocaine in El Rio. Both informants purchased heroin from Chávelo under police-controlled circumstances. During the first…