People v. John, 55 V.I. 1324

Detective Naomi Joseph sought a warrant to search John's home for child pornography based solely on an affidavit alleging that offenders hide evidence at home, but the affidavit did not link John to child pornography.
The warrant sought materials including pornographic magazines, photos of children, and computer files; the magistrate found probable cause for evidence of sexual offenses against children at school and related notebooks.
During execution, officers found two spiral notebooks (red and blue) identified by witnesses, then continued to seize computers and journals; no child pornography was found.
The journals contained evidence related to aggravated rape, unlawful sexual contact, child abuse, and neglect, which led John to move to suppress as outside the warrant’s scope and/or obtained without probable cause.
Virgin Islands Superior Court suppressed the journals, and the Virgin Islands Supreme Court affirmed, holding the search for child pornography was not supported by probable cause and the good-faith exception did not apply.
This Third Circuit review focused on whether the Virgin Islands Supreme Court’s ruling aligned with Herring v. United States regarding the good-faith exception and whether the exclusionary rule should apply.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 1613 permits certiorari review of the Virgin Islands Supreme Court decision	Government argues § 1613 provides certiorari review over final VI Supreme Court decisions.	John contends § 1613 limits review and § 3731 governs only district-court appeals; VI Supreme Court is not a district court.	§ 1613 provides jurisdiction; review granted.
Whether the Virgin Islands Supreme Court's suppression ruling conflicts with Herring on the good-faith exception	VI Supreme Court erred by not applying good-faith exception to an affidavit lacking probable cause for child pornography.	Joseph acted with unreasonable reliance; suppression appropriate to deter law enforcement.	The good-faith exception did not apply; suppression affirmed.
Whether the affidavit had probable cause to search for child pornography based on a correlation to child abuse	Affidavit reasonably inferred a correlation; warrants need not be perfect to establish probable cause.	Correlation between molestation and pornography was absent; affidavit failed to allege connection.	Affidavit lacked indicia of probable cause for child pornography; suppression should apply.
Whether the evidence seized beyond the identified notebooks falls within the warrant’s scope	Redacted or severable evidence could be admitted if tied to valid portions.	Journals were outside the scope and should be suppressed.	Evidence beyond the identified notebooks must be suppressed.

Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135 (U.S. 2009) (limits on deterrence and when exclusion applies)
United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (U.S. 1984) (good-faith reliance on warrant later found invalid)
United States v. Tracey, 597 F.3d 140 (3d Cir. 2010) (four exceptions where reliance on a warrant is not objectively reasonable)
Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (U.S. 1983) (probable cause as a practical test; totality of circumstances)
United States v. Hodson, 543 F.3d 286 (6th Cir. 2008) (no probable cause where nexus between molestation and pornography not shown)
United States v. Colbert, 605 F.3d 573 (8th Cir. 2010) (intuitive relationship between molestation and pornography; alternative suppression analysis)
United States v. Falso, 544 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2008) (rejects unsupported inferences linking crimes in probable cause)
Davis v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2419 (S. Ct. 2011) (exclusionary rule deterred only when appropriate; balancing costs)
Zimmerman, 277 F.3d 426 (3d Cir. 2002) (probable cause and the four-corners rule cited in Tracey)