A warrant to seize computers in a child pornography case includes the power to search it. There was probable cause for the search warrants, and the Franks challenge was too deficient to get a hearing. United States v. Cohen, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164585 (D. Nev. July 3, 2017), adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164750 (D. Nev. Oct. 3, 2017).

“Based on the totality of the circumstances and, in particular, the Brignoni-Ponce factors, BPA Gonzalez possessed sufficient reasonable suspicion to warrant the stop ….” United States v. Garcia-Gonzalez,2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 167655 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 26, 2017).*

The trial court erred in allowing defendant’s motion to suppress because the warrant affidavit established probable cause to believe defendant, acting through a middleman, sold cocaine to a street-level dealer. Thus, the seizure of nine cell phones found in defendant’s apartment was supported by probable cause because the warrant established a sufficient nexus between defendant’s participation in the transaction and his residence to permit a search for the cell phone used to arrange the sale. The affidavit for the warrant set forth facts derived from DMV and direct police observation that defendant lived at the apartment named in the search warrant affidavit. It was thus reasonable to infer that defendant likely kept his clothing, including the orange sweatshirt he wore while conducting the transaction, in the apartment. Commonwealth v. Perkins, 2017 Mass. LEXIS 760 (Oct. 10, 2017).