The CSLI warrant here was based on probable cause from a CI. “In sum, the Affidavit was not required to contain a statement regarding the confidential informant’s reliability and its absence is not dispositive of the reliability determination or the probable cause assessment. Magistrate Judge Eddy could reasonably infer that the CI provided accurate information based on its consistency with facts already known to law enforcement and because agents directly supervised the CI’s cooperation. Thus, there is no merit to Defendant’s claim that the CI was unreliable or that the warrant was not supported by probable cause. Under the totality of the circumstances, the information contained in the Affidavit established probable cause for issuance of the “ping” warrant to track the target telephone used by Defendant.” United States v. Brown, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132848 (W.D.Pa. Aug. 21, 2017).
Two Playpen warrants sustained. United States v. Wheeler, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133211 (N.D. Ga. June 12, 2017),* adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133317 (N.D. Ga. Aug. 21, 2017)*; United States v. Caswell, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133212 (M.D. Fla. July 11, 2017).*