W.D.Pa.: Even a closed email account adds nothing to a child porn staleness argument

Officers in the U.S. received information from Queensland, Australia that an Australian using a hotmail account had been emailing child pornography. One of those was in this district. By the time the search warrant was sought nine months later, the hotmail account had been closed. “Age of the information supporting a warrant application is a factor in determining probable cause. If too old, the information is stale, and probable cause may no longer exist. Age alone, however, does not determine staleness. … Rather, we must also examine the nature of the crime and the type of evidence.” In this circuit, search warrants far older than that have been sustained. United States v. Coca, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165594 (W.D.Pa. Dec. 1, 2016). [Anybody aware of a CP staleness challenge ever working?]

There was reasonable suspicion on the totality. Defendant specifically challenged whether the officer could have seen the stock of a shotgun. Granting that possibility, there was still reasonable suspicion without that. United States v. Perez-Boscana, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165557 (E.D.Pa. Nov. 30, 2016).*

This entry was posted in Reasonable suspicion, Staleness. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.