Legal Question in Criminal Law in California

Re: search and leagal rights

Sorry, but I don't see how you could get the evidence excluded.

Hearing a credible report that someone has a gun is usually more than enough to justify a search. A search that is justified at the outset remains justified unless and until the police violate the subject's rights, which does not seem to have happened here. Police who unexpectedly find evidence of a different crime while conducting a proper search need not ignore this evidence; this is true even if the evidence they originally sought was not found.

In court, the only evidence the prosecutor will need is the officer's testimony that an unidentified person told him your husband had a gun and that, while searching him for the gun, he found the cocaine. There is no need for testimony from the person who made the report.

There may be arguments available to counsel which are not apparent from your question. For example, there may be reason to doubt the officer's story about why he searched your husband, or to make the report seem so unreliable that it did not give the officer adequate reason to conduct the search. Even these arguments will only work if your husband was searched against his will; if he consented to the search they probably won't succeed.