E.D.Mo.: Single image that officer opined was CP is PC

“Under Supreme Court and Eighth Circuit law, Detective Erwin’s professional opinion [based on her experience] that the file contained child pornography was sufficient to establish probable case for the issuance of the search warrant. See Ornelas, 517 U.S. at 700; Mutschelknaus, 592 F.3d at 828-29. The Court therefore rejects this portion of Defendant’s challenge to the sufficiency of probable cause.” “Detective Erwin thus was under no obligation to investigate further, as she possessed a sufficient basis to present the search warrant application to a judge.” A couple of years old possible child pornography picture wasn’t stale: “The Eighth Circuit has recognized ‘“the compulsive nature of the crime of possession of child pornography and the well-established hoarding habits of child pornography collectors.”’ Espinoza, 9 F.4th at 636 …” United States v. Becker, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45912 (E.D. Mo. Jan. 28, 2025).*

“Furthermore, Petitioner has failed to establish that a Fourth Amendment challenge would have been meritorious.” It wouldn’t succeed. Perry v. United States, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42730 (W.D. Tenn. Mar. 10, 2025).*

The CI had been used before, and he reported seeing drugs in defendant’s house within the last 72 hours. All things considered, this was not stale. United States v. Dutton, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5954 (6th Cir. Mar. 11, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Ineffective assistance, Informant hearsay, Probable cause, Staleness. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.