The Aguilar-Spinelli Test: A Two-Pronged Approach to Probable Cause

Q: Is the Aguilar-Spinelli Test still used today?

While it has been replaced by a different standard in many jurisdictions, some states continue to apply it.

Q: What are the two prongs of the test?

The two prongs are the informant&#039;s reliability and the disclosure of underlying circumstances supporting the informant&#039;s information.

Definition & Meaning

The Aguilar-Spinelli Test is a legal standard established by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 (1964). This test is used to determine the reliability of hearsay evidence when establishing probable cause for arrests or search warrants. The test consists of two main components: first, the magistrate must be informed of the reasons that support the credibility of the informant; second, the magistrate must be provided with the underlying circumstances that led to the informant's information. Although the Supreme Court later abandoned this test in Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983), some states, including Alaska, Massachusetts, New York, Tennessee, Vermont, and Washington, continue to apply it based on their state constitutions.

Table of content

Legal Use & context

The Aguilar-Spinelli Test is primarily used in criminal law, particularly in cases involving search warrants and arrests. Law enforcement must demonstrate that the information obtained from an informant is credible and reliable before a magistrate can issue a warrant. Users can manage related legal processes, such as applying for search warrants, using appropriate legal forms provided by resources like US Legal Forms.

Key legal elements

Real-world examples

Here are a couple of examples of abatement:

Example 1: A police officer receives a tip from an informant about drug activity in a specific location. To obtain a search warrant, the officer must provide evidence that the informant has previously provided reliable information and explain how they obtained their knowledge of the drug activity.

Example 2: A detective learns from a source that a suspect is involved in a robbery. The detective must demonstrate the source's credibility and detail the circumstances that led to this information before a judge can grant a search warrant for the suspect's property. (hypothetical example)

State-by-state differences

State	Application of Aguilar-Spinelli Test
Alaska	Accepted based on state constitution.
Massachusetts	Continues to apply the test.
New York	Utilizes the Aguilar-Spinelli Test.
Tennessee	Recognizes the test in legal proceedings.
Vermont	Follows the Aguilar-Spinelli standard.
Washington	Applies the test in relevant cases.

This is not a complete list. State laws vary and users should consult local rules for specific guidance.

Comparison with related terms

Term	Definition
Illinois v. Gates	Supreme Court case that replaced the Aguilar-Spinelli Test with a totality of the circumstances approach.
Probable Cause	The standard by which law enforcement has the grounds to make an arrest, conduct a search, or obtain a warrant.

Common misunderstandings

What to do if this term applies to you

If you find yourself in a situation where the Aguilar-Spinelli Test may apply, it is important to gather all relevant information that supports the credibility of any informants involved. Consider consulting with a legal professional to ensure that your rights are protected and that proper procedures are followed. Additionally, users can explore ready-to-use legal form templates from US Legal Forms to assist with the necessary legal documentation.

Find the legal form that fits your case

Browse our library of 85,000+ state-specific legal templates.

This field is required

Quick facts

Standard established in 1964 by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Used primarily in criminal law for search warrants and arrests.
Two main components: informant reliability and underlying circumstances.
Some states continue to apply the test despite its abandonment by the Supreme Court.