Does the precedure of protocol matter when evidence is found ?

Ok police come to the front door ,asked for my husband ? They asked him about a particular item , that is supposedly stolen .He had the item in the backyard , which police was already back there. no warrant .He didn't know it was tolen property. Then police asked father-in-law(property owner) if they could search the shed to see if any more of THOSE items r in there.He aid yes and signed a paper . Well when they walked in they could see there were no more of those items in there. But, there is a second small locked door in there . They said , we've got to get in that room .Told my husband to unlock it. he got the keys and unlocked it (cause he thought he had to like they said )they found items that suggested there was a lab for manufacturing a contrld sub in there. Now , u have to go through one state to get to our house in another state. uleave one curve around through the other to get back into my state. Anyway , , it was not our state that discovered the alledged lab , plus there were officer walking in and out , no pics were taken , or evidence bagged the whole time . Then they realize they were in wrong state . So they then call narcotics of the right state. When they finally show up , they send all the other officers off .There is now only two nar. agents there. She tries to get a search warrant to search the house and rest of the property. for like an hour and a half.It wasn't granted. She nvr could get one. So she and her partner start loading the remnants of the supposed lab into her truck bed. Her words at that time was "thank your lucky stars the crime scene was contaminated , no one is being charged with anything ."Well seven days later one officer comes to the houe with an arrest warrant for my husband , charged with poss of a contolled sub.he bonded out , now a year later the state sends him a courtdate for another arraignment . Now, whats goin on ? Can they do that ? Is it an indictment ? Did the prosecution lie in order to get it ? and , r they bluffing trying to get him to confess cause they know what they have can't be admissible ? help