Gates v. Aguilar-Spinelli Test

Sean C. Monaghan

Issue: How many states follow the Supreme Court decision in Gates, holding that probable cause for issuing a search warrant is to be determined by considering the totality of the circumstances; and how many states reject the Gates analysis and continue to apply the two-prong test established by the Court in Aguilar and Spinelli, a more rigorous standard?

Of those states following Gates, how many continue to emphasize the importance of the Aguilar-Spinelli factors? (Ch. 3; Note 2 after Utterback)

September 18, 1998

The vast majority of states (forty-five states and the District of Columbia) have adopted the totality of the circumstances analysis in Gates. See e.g., Iowa v. Randle, 55 N.W. 666 (Iowa 1996); Pennsylvania v. Jones, 668 A.2d 114 (1995) (the magistrate should use his or her "practical commonsense" to determine whether under the totality of the circumstances there is probable cause to issue a search warrant); Wallace v. Texas, 932 S.W.2d 519 (Tex. 1995). Most of these states have applied the language of Gates and have specifically rejected the Aguilar-Spinelli analysis. A few jurisdictions following Gates (the District of Columbia, Georgia, South Dakota, and Utah) have, however, continued to consider the Aguilar-Spinelli factors in conjunction with Gates. See e.g., Utah v. Lee 863 P.2d 49 (Utah) (retaining the Aguilar-Spinelli factors as "guides" to applying Gates).

A small minority of six states (Alaska, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, and Tennessee) continue to adhere to the Aguilar-Spinelli analysis. Tennessee has softened the application of these rigid factors by not construing the factors "hyper-technically." Tennessee v. Jacumin, 778 S.W.2d 430 (Tenn. 1989).

STATES REJECTING GATES