\u201cUnder 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.\u201d \u201cDetective Erwin thus was under no obligation to investigate further, as she possessed a sufficient basis to present the search warrant application to a judge.\u201d A couple of years old possible child pornography picture wasn\u2019t stale: \u201cThe Eighth Circuit has recognized \u2018\u201cthe compulsive nature of the crime of possession of child pornography and the well-established hoarding habits of child pornography collectors.\u201d\u2019 Espinoza, 9 F.4th at 636 \u2026\u201d United States v. Becker, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45912 (E.D. Mo. Jan. 28, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cFurthermore, Petitioner has failed to establish that a Fourth Amendment challenge would have been meritorious.\u201d It wouldn\u2019t succeed. Perry v. United States, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42730 (W.D. Tenn. Mar. 10, 2025).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The CI had been used before, and he reported seeing drugs in defendant\u2019s 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).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cUnder 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; … Continue reading