CA11: While time wasn’t clearly stated, it was inferred on the totality; therefore, not stale

While the affidavit for the search warrant didn’t clearly specify a time frame, it was inferred, and it was clearly reasonable to conclude on the totality that the defendant would still have the sought after images on his computer. United States v. Kirkham, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 9799 (11th Cir. Apr. 16, 2018):

We recognize that the affidavit provided no clear time frame to establish probable cause that evidence of Kirkham’s relationship with the victim still existed when the warrant was obtained. However, even if the affidavit was insufficient to establish probable cause, we cannot say that the officers were “entirely unreasonable” in believing that it was sufficient. The affidavit provided that the victim had sent nude photographs of himself to Kirkham “since he was 14 years old,” suggesting — although not precisely saying — that sending nude photographs was an ongoing occurrence. That implication was bolstered by the statement that the victim had “observed numerous pornographic images” of himself on Kirkham’s computer. Additionally, the affidavit said that Kirkham and the victim had been in a sexual relationship “over the last two years” and had engaged in sexual intercourse several times. On this record, it would not be unreasonable, much less “entirely unreasonable” for an officer to believe that a man who received numerous nude photographs from a boy with whom he had a two-year sexual relationship would still possess those photographs, even if the relationship had ended. Thus, the district court did not err in concluding that the good-faith exception applied, or in denying the motion to suppress.