In a theft case, 20 days between the theft of someone’s personal belongings and a search warrant for defendant’s house was not too stale. “Yet not too much time had passed to raise staleness concerns.” State v. Barboza-Cortes, 2018 Wash. App. LEXIS 2046 (Aug. 30, 2018):
¶86 Here, the timing of the warrant and the nature of the items sought supported probable cause for issuance of the warrant. By the time the police sought the warrant, 20 days had passed since the original theft and over a week had passed since Mr. Barboza-Cortes had deposited stolen checks into his bank account. Mr. Barboza-Cortes thus had sufficient time to secrete evidence related to stolen property at his residence. Yet not too much time had passed to raise staleness concerns. In addition, the nature of the items sought (a stolen backpack, indicia of residence, a pair of shoes) are the types of items likely stored at a home. Based on the allegations set forth in the warrant affidavit, there was a sufficient basis to believe that evidence outlined in the affidavit would be found at Mr. Barboza-Cortes’s home.