ÿWPC ‘r”æ•ÖN˜·y±Î(ü |Ê™«õ³¹ÄG ­€-_QhÝŠüiòSFV¸‘‚`LÀR®‹:„º¤R›K9Žø”èFf&ÉŠ˜Äx³­NMçèœdÃ# “ü[ ×쓱ÞäWðr%º¹=ˆµòlÉÜšè顾¢ÙÙª’½µ–Ûùöô«§ï'÷Ý,<™SýÁi3öÖüi™ÕmIjóR°_S+>¡‘­•m"~óç²ÞT¤®ïH ×tÁÞß{2™ìGK™ë+²è¼Iáž«ÁŽ›þþ9%Öm»6Ô2éÉÖÓ}%¯¡Ï…Ç9$í[lËR2¼ãoØ !Â8†6Óš™?O¶°o/¸Uò¼ž¾$ï¦!Õh¤¨°Ÿ›‹B% (éœáŸÊ‘Þ”ºYg€ <Á_è€Åm~µÓ‡¯Üí‚bÞêâ.‡à.`DþAâ-›:¡ÝDå›*ð«@—lèÐTï}½Gk“ ӓÈbÏç´~‘¦Ñlì• ´yvÜGŒÑv^ÓZÝBJ#`YqV¯EîÉ ½Îž˜ÿðᇙžïF šÑœ_d“;²£|˜A9Oån G1O0X³Úiÿ¥C•È*«êÁö…ÛÈºÚ ûyzØòØq˜QÕ§b %\^ b 0ŸnUN w[4_s z‚ÒüÎ mÐ #Áç ç ƨ Æn Æ4 Æú ú NÀÀÀEÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂÂbÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ 0ÌÌÌÌ BÎÎ 0»ë D3¦ D-Ù 0K ASQƤ 0»j 0D% A«i»]³^) (wØÉ$¡¡Ô  ÔÑ  ÑÑ€..ÑÑ8€å»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ýý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularÖJ~' ?¥3|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- ù-(“G2«$¤¤Ý ƒØÉ!ÝÔ  ÔÑ  ÑÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôs´ò»»Ô d(“3•$££Ý ƒØÉ!ÝÔ  ÔÑ  ÑÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(“3•$¢¢Ý ƒØÉ!ÝÔ  ÔÑ  ÑÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒØÉ!ÝÔ  ÔÑ  ÑÑ€.ÑÑ8€»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑe°ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼»»»ÔÑ8€e\XXdæ»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡î(³î»¼ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ e Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼»îî(³%#ԈР…  ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àSeptember€19,€2000€SessionÐ ¥@ ÐÔ‡Xe\X»¼ÔÌò òÔ#†¼»XXe\1#ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE€v.€WARNER€CARL€POWELL€Ð ™4 Ðand€CHARLIE€EDWARD€STOKES€Ð § B ÐÔ‡Xe\X»¼Ôó óÌÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Montgomery€CountyÐ   Ðà@@øøìàNo.€39480€€€€€€Robert€W.€Ô_ÔWedemeyerÔ_Ô,€JudgeÐ g   ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<` AßÐ ´  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M1999„00661„CCA„R3„CD€„€Filed€October€30,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ ©  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<Ù` AßÐ Úu Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€is€an€appeal€as€of€right€by€the€State€of€Tennessee,€which€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€byÐ Ïj Ðsuppressing€the€evidence€obtained€against€the€Defendants€pursuant€to€a€search€warrant.€€The€StateÐ µP Ðasserts€that€the€trial€court€incorrectly€concluded€that€the€search€warrant€was€invalid€because€the€agentÐ ›6 Ðwho€provided€the€information€in€the€affidavit€establishing€probable€cause€to€search€did€not€have€theÐ  Ðauthority€to€execute€the€warrant€or€arrest€the€Defendants.€€In€response,€the€Defendants€assert€that€theÐ g ÐState's€notice€of€appeal€was€not€timely€filed,€and€they€argue€that€the€evidence€was€properlyÐ Mè Ðsuppressed€because€the€agent€did€not€have€the€authority€to€obtain€or€execute€the€search€warrant€andÐ 3Î Ðbecause€the€affidavit€did€not€establish€the€veracity€of€the€confidential€informant.€€We€conclude€thatÐ ´ Ðthe€State's€notice€of€appeal€was€not€timely€filed,€but€we€will€consider€the€appeal€in€the€interest€ofÐ ÿš Ðjustice.€€We€further€conclude€that€the€search€warrant€was€valid;€thus€the€trial€court€erred€byÐ å€ Ðsuppressing€the€evidence€obtained€pursuant€to€the€warrant.€€Accordingly,€the€trial€court's€orderÐ Ëf Ðsuppressing€the€evidence€is€reversed,€and€this€case€is€remanded€for€further€proceedings€consistentÐ ±L Ðwith€this€opinion.€Ð —2 ÐÓÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Reversed.ó óÐ c þ  ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼»àXe\ä#ÔÔ‡Xe\X.¼ÔDavid€H.€Welles,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJoe€G.€Rileyóó€and€òòNorma€McGeeÐ /"Ê" ÐOgle,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð #°# ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Todd€R.€Kelley,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€JohnÐ á$| % ÐÔ_ÔCarneyÔ_Ô,€District€Attorney€General;€and€C.€Daniel€Ô_ÔBrollierÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,Ð Ç%b!& Ðfor€the€appellant,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð ­&H"' ÐÌJack€M.€Butler,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Warner€Carl€Powell.Ð y($) ÐPeter€M.€Olson,€Clarksville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Charlie€Edward€Stokes.Ð _)ú$* ÐÔ#†¼»XXe\’ #ÔÔ‡Xe\X»¼ÔÌÓc ÓÌÐ  ,¬'-ý ÐÔ_Ôà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼»XXe\­#ÔÔ‡Xe\X»¼ÔÐ e ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼»XXe\I#ÔÔ‡Xe\X»¼ÔÓ  Óà  àThe€Defendants,€Warner€Carl€Powell€and€Charlie€Edward€Stokes,€were€arrested€followingÐ 1Ì Ðthe€execution€of€a€search€warrant€obtained€by€Agent€Russ€Winkler€of€the€Tennessee€AlcoholicÐ ² ÐBeverage€Commission€(ABC).€€The€warrant€was€executed€by€Agent€Winkler€and€members€of€theÐ ý˜ ÐSpecial€Operations€Unit€of€the€Clarksville€Police€Department.€€The€search€warrant€was€issued€forÐ ã~ Ðand€executed€at€a€residence€located€in€Montgomery€County,€outside€the€Clarksville€city€limits.€€TheÐ É d Ðwarrant€stated€that€the€evidence€sought€was€"All€controlled€substances,€specifically,Ð ¯ J Ðmethamphetamine."€€Methamphetamine€and€marijuana€were€found€at€the€residence.€€Ð • 0 ÐÌà  àBoth€Defendants€were€indicted€in€December€1997€for€multiple€counts€of€possession€of€aÐ a ü  Ðcontrolled€substance€with€intent€to€sell€or€deliver.€€They€subsequently€filed€motions€to€suppress€theÐ Gâ  Ðevidence€obtained€against€them,€contending€that€the€search€warrant€authorizing€the€search€of€theirÐ -È  Ðresidence€was€defective€because€the€affidavit€used€to€establish€probable€cause€was€sworn€by€an€agentÐ ®  Ðof€the€ABC€who€lacked€the€authority€to€investigate€the€possession€and€sale€of€methamphetamine.€Ð ù”  ÐThe€Defendants€also€alleged€that€the€affidavit€failed€to€establish€the€credibility€of€the€confidentialÐ ßz  Ðinformant€who€supplied€the€information€relied€upon.€€After€a€hearing,€the€trial€court€found€that€theÐ Å` Ðwarrant€was€invalid€because€the€agent€of€the€ABC€did€not€have€the€authority€to€search€forÐ «F Ðmethamphetamine€and€because€the€affidavit€did€not€show€the€credibility€of€the€confidentialÐ ‘, Ðinformant.€€In€an€order€entered€on€October€30,€1998,€the€trial€court€suppressed€the€evidence€obtainedÐ w Ðas€a€result€of€the€search€warrant.€€Subsequently,€on€December€11,€1998,€the€State€moved€to€dismissÐ ]ø Ðthe€case€because€it€could€not€proceed€to€trial€with€the€evidence€suppressed.€€The€order€dismissingÐ CÞ Ðthe€case€was€filed€on€December€17,€1998,€and€the€State€filed€its€notice€of€appeal€on€January€14,Ð )Ä Ð1999.Ð ª ÐÌà@Y Y ìàTIMELINESS€OF€NOTICE€OF€APPEALˆÐ Ûv ÐÌà  àÔ#†¼»XXe\§#ÔÔ€Xe\X»¼ÔRule€3(c)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure€provides€that€an€appeal€by€the€StateÐ §B Ð"lies€only€from€an€order€or€judgment€entered€by€a€trial€court€from€which€an€appeal€lies€to€theÐ ( ÐSupreme€Court€or€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals:€(1)€the€substantive€effect€of€which€results€inÐ s Ðdismissing€an€indictment,€information,€or€complaint."€€A€notice€of€appeal€must€be€filed€within€thirtyÐ Yô Ðdays€of€the€entry€of€the€judgment€appealed€from.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€4(a).€€In€moving€to€dismiss€theÐ ? Ú Ðindictment€because€it€could€not€proceed€to€trial€without€the€suppressed€evidence,€the€State€essentiallyÐ %!À  Ðconceded€that€the€substantive€effect€of€the€suppression€order€was€the€dismissal€of€the€indictment.€Ð  "¦! ÐThus,€the€State€should€have€filed€its€notice€of€appeal€within€thirty€days€from€the€entry€of€theÐ ñ"Œ" Ðsuppression€order,€which€was€entered€on€October€30,€1998.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Leeóó,€836€S.W.2d€126,€127Ð ×#r# Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€Because€the€State€did€not€file€its€notice€of€appeal€until€January€14,€1998,Ð ½$X $ Ðthe€notice€was€not€timely€filed.Ð £%>!% ÐÌà  àHowever,€Rule€4(a)€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure€provides€that€the€filingÐ o' #' Ðof€the€notice€of€appeal€in€criminal€cases€is€not€jurisdictional,€and€the€filing€may€be€waived€in€theÐ U(ð#( Ðinterest€of€justice.€€The€State€asserts€that€the€assistant€district€attorney€general€believed€in€good€faithÐ ;)Ö$) Ðthat€the€notice€of€appeal€was€not€due€until€thirty€days€after€the€indictments€were€actually€dismissed,Ð !*¼%* Ðand€it€asks€us€to€waive€the€filing€of€the€notice€of€appeal€in€this€case.€€We€grant€the€State's€request€inÐ +¢&+ Ðthe€interest€of€justice,€and€we€consider€its€issue€on€the€merits.Ð í+ˆ', Їà@Á Á ìàVALIDITY€OF€SEARCH€WARRANTˆÐ e ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€determined€that€the€search€warrant€was€invalid€because€Agent€Winkler,€anÐ 1Ì Ðagent€for€the€ABC,€did€not€have€the€authority€to€obtain€and€execute€the€search€warrant.€€Pursuant€toÐ ² Ðstatute,€agents€of€the€ABC€may€investigate€violations€of€the€drug€laws€and€may€arrest€a€personÐ ý˜ Ðwithout€a€warrant€if€they€have€probable€cause€to€believe€that€the€person€is€committing€a€felony€drugÐ ã~ Ðoffense€on€premises€licensed€by€the€commission,€on€any€premises€under€investigation€by€theÐ É d Ðcommission€in€conjunction€with€its€other€duties€and€responsibilities,€or€on€any€other€premises€sellingÐ ¯ J Ðalcoholic€beverages.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€57„1„210.€€In€addition,€agents€have€explicit€authorityÐ • 0 Ðto€enforce€the€provisions€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„17„417(g),€which€prohibit€aÐ {   Ðperson€from€manufacturing,€delivering,€selling,€or€possessing€with€intent€to€manufacture,€deliver,Ð a ü  Ðor€sell€a€Schedule€VI€controlled€substance.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€ðððð€57„1„208,€39„17„417(g).€€This€authority€is€notÐ Gâ  Ðlimited€to€premises€licensed€by€the€commission€or€premises€selling€alcoholic€beverages.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€Ð -È  ÐHowever,€the€authority€to€investigate€drug€offenses€in€this€manner€is€expressly€limited€to€ScheduleÐ ®  ÐVI€drugs,€which€are€marijuana,€tetrahydrocannabinols,€and€synthetic€equivalents€of€the€substancesÐ ù”  Ðcontained€in€the€plant€òòcannabisóó.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€ðððð€57„1„208,€39„17„415.€Ð ßz  ÐÌà  àWe€agree€with€the€trial€court€and€the€Defendants€that€based€on€these€statutes,€Agent€WinklerÐ «F Ðdid€not€have€the€authority€to€investigate€the€possession€or€sale€of€methamphetamine€at€the€residenceÐ ‘, Ðsearched.€€Notwithstanding,€Agent€Winkler€provided€the€affidavit€in€support€of€the€search€warrantÐ w Ðin€this€case,€in€which€he€asserted€that€there€was€probable€cause€to€believe€that€methamphetamine,Ð ]ø Ða€Schedule€II€controlled€substance,€was€located€at€the€residence€to€be€searched.€€The€search€warrantÐ CÞ Ðdescribed€the€evidence€to€be€searched€for€as€"All€controlled€substances,€specifically,Ð )Ä Ðmethamphetamine."€€The€Defendants€thus€argue€that€because€Agent€Winkler€did€not€have€theÐ ª Ðauthority€to€investigate€drug€offenses€involving€methamphetamine€located€at€a€private€residence,Ð õ ÐAgent€Winkler€did€not€have€the€authority€to€provide€the€affidavit€for€the€search€warrant.€€WeÐ Ûv Ðrespectfully€disagree.€€Ð Á\ ÐÌà  àTennessee€Rule€of€Criminal€Procedure€41,€dealing€with€search€warrants,€provides€in€relevantÐ ( Ðpart:Ð s Ðà8  à(a)€Authority€to€Issue€Warrant.€„„€A€search€warrant€authorized€by€this€rule€may€beÐ Yô Ðissued€by€a€magistrate€with€jurisdiction€within€the€county€wherein€the€propertyÐ ? Ú Ðsought€is€located,€òòupon€requestóó€of€the€district€attorney€general€or€assistant€or€criminalÐ %!À  Ðinvestigator,€òòor€any€other€law„enforcement€officeróó.Ð "¦!Ð Ð  Ðà  à.€.€.Ð ñ"Œ" Ðà8  à(c)€A€warrant€shall€issue€only€on€an€affidavit€or€affidavits€sworn€to€before€theÐ ×#r# Ðmagistrate€and€establishing€the€grounds€of€issuing€the€warrant.€.€.€.€òòThe€searchÐ ½$X $ Ðwarrant€shall€be€directed€toóó€and€served€by€the€sheriff€or€any€deputy€sheriff€of€theÐ £%>!% Ðcounty€wherein€issued,€any€constable,€or€òòany€other€peace€officer€with€authority€in€theÐ ‰&$"& Ðcountyóó.Ðo' #'Ð Ð  ÐÌ(Emphasis€added).€€òòSee€alsoóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„6„101€to€„107.€€Ð ;)Ö$) ÐÌà  àWe€first€note€that€while€this€rule€limits€the€class€of€persons€who€may€request€a€search€warrantÐ +¢&+ Ðto€the€district€attorney€general,€assistant€district€attorney€general,€criminal€investigator,€or€any€law„Ð í+ˆ', Ðenforcement€officer,€the€rule€does€not€limit€the€making€of€the€affidavit€to€any€particular€class€ofÐ e Ðpersons.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€41.€€Likewise,€we€can€find€no€statute€which€limits€the€making€ofÐ Kæ Ðaffidavits€to€any€particular€class€of€persons.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„6„101€to€„107.€€The€lawÐ 1Ì Ðmerely€requires€that€a€search€warrant€be€issued€ð ðonly€on€an€affidavit€or€affidavits€sworn€to€beforeÐ ² Ðthe€magistrate€and€establishing€the€grounds€of€issuing€the€warrant.ðð€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€41(c).€Ð ý˜ ÐWe€thus€conclude€that€the€person€providing€the€affidavit€for€the€search€warrant€does€not€have€to€beÐ ã~ Ðthe€same€person€who€requests€the€search€warrant€and€does€not€have€to€be€in€the€same€class€of€personsÐ É d Ðas€those€who€may€request€a€search€warrant.€€òòSeeóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Johnsonóó,€641€F.2d€652,€656€(9òòthóó€Cir.Ð ¯ J Ð1980)€(ð ðRule€41€sanctions€a€procedure€under€which€a€witness€other€than€the€requestor€may€supplyÐ • 0 Ðthe€facts€necessary€to€satisfy€the€probable€cause€requirement.ðð);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòUnited€States€v.€Sangineto„Ð {   ÐMirandaóó,€859€F.2d€1501,€1514€(6òòthóó€Cir.€1988);€òòUnited€States€v.€Carraóó,€604€F.2d€1271,€1273€(10òòthóó€Cir.Ð a ü  Ð1979).€€Accordingly,€the€fact€that€Agent€Winkler€provided€the€affidavit€establishing€probable€causeÐ Gâ  Ðis€irrelevant€because€any€person€may€provide€probable€cause.€€The€issue€before€us€is€whether€AgentÐ -È  ÐWinkler€had€the€authority€to€request€the€search€warrant.€€€Ð ®  ÐÌà  àOur€supreme€court€has€previously€held€valid€search€warrants€obtained€by€law„enforcementÐ ßz  Ðofficers€without€jurisdiction€within€the€county€where€the€property€to€be€searched€was€located€whenÐ Å` Ðthe€warrants€were€executed€by€law„enforcement€officers€having€jurisdiction€in€the€county.€€òòSeeóó€òòStateÐ «F Ðv.€Smithóó€868€S.W.2d€561,€572€(Tenn.€1993);€òòState€v.€Pigfordóó,€572€S.W.2d€921,€922€(Tenn.€1978);Ð ‘, Ðòòsee€alsoóó€òòWilliam€J.€Logan€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9808„CR„00287,€1999€WL€1018187,€at€*4„6€(Tenn.Ð w ÐCrim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Nov.€10,€1999).€€In€òòPigfordóó,€an€officer€with€the€Federal€Drug€EnforcementÐ ]ø ÐAgency€provided€the€affidavit€for€and€requested€a€search€warrant€addressed€to€any€peace€officer€inÐ CÞ ÐShelby€County,€and€in€òòSmithóó,€an€officer€with€the€Metropolitan€Nashville€Police€Department€providedÐ )Ä Ðthe€affidavit€for€and€requested€a€search€warrant€addressed€to€any€peace€officer€in€Robertson€County.€Ð ª ÐòòSeeóó€òòPigfordóó,€572€S.W.2d€at€921;€òòSmithóó,€868€S.W.2d€at€572„73.€€In€both€cases,€the€officers€withoutÐ õ Ðjurisdiction€in€the€county€participated€in€the€resulting€search,€but€they€were€accompanied€by€officersÐ Ûv Ðwith€jurisdiction€in€the€county.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€€Thus,€the€court€found€that€the€warrants€were€validly€obtainedÐ Á\ Ðand€executed.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€€More€recently,€we€found€valid€a€search€warrant€issued€for€property€inÐ §B ÐHawkins€County€when€the€officer€requesting€the€search€warrant€did€not€have€jurisdiction€in€the€partÐ ( Ðof€Hawkins€County€where€the€property€was€located.€€òòSeeóó€òòWilliam€J.€Loganóó,€1999€WL€1018187,€atÐ s Ð*6.€€In€addressing€Tennessee€Rule€of€Criminal€Procedure€41(a),€which€allows€a€search€warrant€toÐ Yô Ðbe€requested€by€"any€other€law„enforcement€officer,"€we€stated,€"This€language€does€not€require€thatÐ ? Ú Ðthe€request€for€the€search€warrant€must€be€made€by€a€law€enforcement€officer€of€the€county€whereÐ %!À  Ðthe€search€is€to€be€conducted,€only€that€the€person€be€a€law€enforcement€officer."€€òòId.óó€Ð  "¦! ÐÌà  àRelying€on€these€cases,€we€hold€that€Agent€Winkler€had€the€authority€to€request€the€searchÐ ×#r# Ðwarrant€in€this€case.€€Although€Agent€Winkler€only€had€limited€jurisdiction€and€authority€toÐ ½$X $ Ðinvestigate€drug€offenses,€he€was€still€a€law„enforcement€officer.€€The€rule€requires€only€that€theÐ £%>!% Ðrequesting€party€be€a€law„enforcement€officer.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó;€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€41(a).€€Moreover,€theÐ ‰&$"& Ðsearch€warrant€was€directed€to€"any€Peace€Officer"€of€Montgomery€County.€€Although€AgentÐ o' #' ÐWinkler€participated€in€the€search,€the€search€was€also€executed€by€members€of€the€SpecialÐ U(ð#( ÐOperations€Unit€of€the€Clarksville€Police€Department.€€There€is€no€challenge€to€their€jurisdiction€toÐ ;)Ö$) Ðexecute€the€warrant.€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€that€Agent€Winkler's€participation€in€securing€andÐ !*¼%* Ðexecuting€the€search€warrant€did€not€render€the€warrant€invalid.Ð +¢&+ ÐÐ í+ˆ', Ðà  àThe€Defendants€also€argue€that€the€warrant€was€invalid€because€the€affidavit€did€not€containÐ e Ðsufficient€information€for€the€magistrate€to€determine€the€veracity€of€the€confidential€informant;€thus,Ð Kæ Ðprobable€cause€to€search€the€residence€was€not€established.€€When€probable€cause€for€a€search€isÐ 1Ì Ðbased€upon€information€from€a€confidential€informant,€there€must€be€a€showing€in€the€affidavit€ofÐ ² Ðboth€(1)€the€informant's€basis€of€knowledge€and€(2)€his€or€her€veracity.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Jacuminóó,€778Ð ý˜ ÐS.W.2d€430,€436€(Tenn.€1989).€€As€we€stated€in€òòState€v.€Moonóó,€841€S.W.2d€336€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð ã~ Ð1992),Ð É d Ѐà8  àUnder€the€first€or€"basis€of€knowledge"€prong,€facts€must€be€revealed€which€permitÐ ¯ J Ðthe€magistrate€to€determine€whether€the€informant€had€a€basis€for€his€or€herÐ • 0 Ðinformation€that€a€certain€person€had€been,€was€or€would€be€involved€in€criminalÐ {   Ðconduct€or€that€evidence€of€crime€would€be€found€at€a€certain€place.€€Under€theÐ a ü  Ðsecond€or€"veracity"€prong,€facts€must€be€revealed€which€permit€the€magistrate€toÐ Gâ  Ðdetermine€either€the€inherent€credibility€of€the€informant€or€the€reliability€of€hisÐ -È  Ðinformation€on€the€particular€occasion.Ю Ð Ð  ÐÌòòId.óó€at€338.€€A€conclusory€allegation€that€the€informant€is€reliable€is€insufficient;€the€affidavit€mustÐ ßz  Ðshow€"underlying€circumstances€from€which€the€magistrate€can€conclude€that€the€informant€isÐ Å` Ðcredible€or€his€information€is€reliable."€€òòId.óó€at€339.€€Also,€independent€police€corroboration€of€theÐ «F Ðinformation€provided€by€the€informant€may€make€up€deficiencies€in€either€prong.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€at€341;Ð ‘, ÐòòJacuminóó,€778€S.W.2d€at€436.€Ð w ÐÌà  àThe€affidavit€at€issue€in€this€case€provided€the€following€statement€of€facts€in€support€ofÐ CÞ Ðprobable€cause:Ð )Ä Ðà8  àA€confidential€informant,€hereafter€referred€to€as€the€CI,€has€made€at€least€oneÐ ª Ðpurchase€of€methamphetamine€from€the€above€described€residence€within€the€last€72Ð õ Ðhours.€€Prior€to€the€purchase,€the€CI€was€searched€by€Agents€of€the€SpecialÐ Ûv ÐOperations€Unit,€and€no€contraband€was€found€on€their€[sic]€person.€€The€CI€was€thenÐ Á\ Ðprovided€with€law€enforcement€funds€to€purchase€the€methamphetamine.€€BeforeÐ §B Ðleaving€your€affiants€[sic]€presence,€the€CI€was€fitted€with€an€electronic€listeningÐ ( Ðdevice.€€This€equipment€allowed€your€affiant€and/or€Agents€of€the€Special€OperationsÐ s ÐUnit€to€monitor€any€and€all€conversations€involving€the€CI.€.€.€.€While€on€the€propertyÐ Yô Ðof€1864€Powell€Rd.,€the€CI€purchased€a€white€powered€substance,€that€wasÐ ? Ú Ðrepresented€to€them€[sic]€as€being€methamphetamine.€€The€CI€also€personallyÐ %!À  Ðobserved€more€methamphetamine,€on€the€property€of€1864€Powell€Rd.,€which€wasÐ  "¦! Ðpackaged€in€a€manner€consistent€to€that€which€was€purchased€by€the€CI.€€UponÐ ñ"Œ" Ðreturning€to€your€affiant€the€CI€released€custody€of€the€white€powdered€substance€toÐ ×#r# Ðyour€affiant.€€A€field€test€of€a€small€portion€of€this€substance€tested€positive€forÐ ½$X $ Ðmethamphetamine,€a€Schedule€II€controlled€substance.€€Based€on€the€precedingÐ £%>!% Ðstatement€of€facts,€and€also€that€the€CI€has€told€your€affiant€that€the€subjects€at€thisÐ ‰&$"& Ðresidence€sell€methamphetamine€and€marijuana€on€a€regular€basis,€your€AffiantÐ o' #' Ðbelieves€that€there€is€more€methamphetamine€stored€on€the€property€at€this€time.€€TheÐ U(ð#( ÐCI€has€further€proven€their€[sic]€reliability€by€providing€information€about€drugÐ ;)Ö$) Ðtrafficking€in€the€city€of€Clarksville€that€your€affiant€or€other€agents€of€the€SpecialÐ !*¼%* ÐOperations€Unit€know€to€be€true€and€accurate€from€independent€investigations€andÐ +¢&+ Ðcorroboration.Ðí+ˆ',Ð Ð  ЇWe€believe€that€this€statement€of€facts€adequately€shows€both€the€informant's€basis€of€knowledgeÐ e Ðand€his€or€her€veracity.€€The€basis€of€knowledge€was€established€by€the€showing€that€the€informantÐ Kæ Ðhad€purchased€methamphetamine€at€the€residence€within€72€hours€prior€to€the€swearing€of€theÐ 1Ì Ðaffidavit.€€Although€the€statement€regarding€the€reliability€of€the€informant€„„€that€the€informant€hadÐ ² Ðproven€to€be€reliable€by€providing€information€about€drug€trafficking€which€had€been€corroboratedÐ ý˜ Ðby€independent€investigations€„„€€was€somewhat€conclusory,€we€find€that€the€reliability€of€theÐ ã~ Ðinformation€given€in€this€case€was€substantiated€by€independent€police€corroboration.€€TheÐ É d Ðinformation€relied€upon€was€the€result€of€a€controlled€purchase.€€The€informant€was€given€moneyÐ ¯ J Ðto€purchase€methamphetamine€and€he€or€she€was€monitored€the€entire€time€through€an€electronicÐ • 0 Ðlistening€device.€€Once€the€informant€completed€the€transaction,€the€substance€believed€to€beÐ {   Ðmethamphetamine€was€turned€over€to€the€police.€€Thus,€we€conclude€that€the€reliability€of€theÐ a ü  Ðinformant's€information€was€more€than€adequately€established.Ð Gâ  ÐÌà  àAccordingly,€the€order€of€the€trial€court€suppressing€the€evidence€obtained€as€a€result€of€theÐ ®  Ðsearch€warrant€is€reversed.€€This€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€further€proceedings€consistentÐ ù”  Ðwith€this€opinion.€Ð ßz  Ðà  àòòóóÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð w Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGE