The following excerpt is from United States v. Thomas, 788 F.3d 345 (2nd Cir. 2015):
The standard of review for evaluating the district court's ruling on a suppression motion is clear error as to the district court's findings of historical facts, but de novo as to ultimate legal conclusions, such as the existence of probable cause. United States v. Raymonda, 780 F.3d 105, 113 (2d Cir.2015).
Probable cause is a fluid conceptturning on the assessment of probabilities in particular factual contextsnot readily, or even usefully, reduced to a neat set of legal rules. Maryland v. Pringle, 540 U.S. 366, 37071, 124 S.Ct. 795, 157 L.Ed.2d 769 (2003) (citation omitted). Indeed,
[788 F.3d 350]
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.