United States v. Alexander McArdle
702 F. App'x 497
| 8th Cir. | 2017Background
- Homeland Security agent identified an IP address allegedly making child-pornography files available via peer-to-peer; agent Aaron Simon downloaded five videos from that IP—four appeared to depict minors, one was ambiguous.
- The IP address was traced to an apartment rented by Alexander McArdle; a search warrant for the apartment was obtained and executed.
- Officers seized computer media; McArdle admitted viewing and deleting child pornography and said he hid/deleted files; the government found child‑pornography on the media but not the five affidavit videos.
- McArdle’s forensic expert examined both the affidavit videos and the seized media: agreed some videos depicted minors, could not identify source or find the affidavit videos on the drives, but did find filenames/remnants for two of the affidavit videos in unallocated space.
- McArdle moved to suppress and requested a Franks hearing, arguing the affidavit contained intentional or reckless false statements because the downloaded videos were not found on his media; the district court denied the motion and request for a hearing, and the Eighth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | McArdle's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether McArdle made the substantial preliminary showing required under Franks to obtain an evidentiary hearing that the warrant affidavit contained intentional or reckless falsehoods material to probable cause | Forensic inability to reproduce the government’s downloads (absence of affidavit videos on seized media) shows the affidavit statements were false or made with reckless disregard | Failure to locate files does not prove falsity; deleted files or removed media can prevent recovery; expert found remnants for two affidavit videos; inability to replicate does not establish deliberate or reckless falsehood | No. The Court held McArdle did not make the required substantial preliminary showing; denial of suppression and Franks hearing affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (Franks framework: preliminary showing required for evidentiary hearing and suppression if affidavit contains intentional or reckless falsehoods)
- United States v. Wajda, 810 F.2d 754 (standard that substantial preliminary showing requirement is not lightly met)
- United States v. Arnold, 725 F.3d 896 (Franks-hearing denial reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- United States v. Kattaria, 553 F.3d 1171 (en banc; cited for standard of review and Franks requirements)