United States v. Allen
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 22920
| 5th Cir. | 2010Background
- Allen challenged a search warrant at suppression, arguing lack of particularity, stale information, overbreadth, and lack of probable cause.
- Indicted on three counts related to shipping and receiving child pornography; Allen pled guilty to Count Three after suppression ruling.
- Warrant and affidavit were contested; district court denied suppression and excluded one defense witness.
- Factual basis tied to Hello program activity connecting 'mrhyde6988' to Allen via Mikowski and IP links to Midland, Texas.
- Court allowed evidence from the search to be admitted under the good-faith exception, and appellate review addressed both good-faith and probable-cause challenges.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the warrant lacked particularity and the good-faith exception applies. | Allen: warrant overly broad; attachments not incorporated. | Allen: good-faith reliance invalid; Groh distinctions irrelevant. | Good-faith exception applies; suppression not warranted. |
| Whether probable cause existed to issue the warrant. | Allen: lascivious images insufficient; stale information; lack of probable cause. | Allen: sufficient indicia of ongoing possession/distribution via Hello and identified users. | Probable cause found; information not stale; images described support probable cause. |
| Whether evidence of lascivious nature of photos supported probable cause. | Allen: photos not clearly lascivious. | Allen: photos described show lascivious nature and support probable cause. | Descriptions sufficient to establish probable cause. |
| Whether the district court erred in excluding testimony about image similarity to library books. | Piette would testify photos similar to those in libraries; relevant to relevance of images. | Testimony not relevant to probable cause or good faith. | Exclusion not error; admissibility of photos not challenged. |
| Whether Groh v. Ramirez precludes good-faith analysis given missing incorporation of attachments. | Groh forbids reliance on defective warrant. | Distinction between civil immunity and exclusionary rule; signs of objective reasonableness exist. | Groh distinguished; good-faith applied due to magistrate's signature and prior review. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984) (good-faith reliance survives warrant defects absent deliberate misconduct)
- Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135 (2009) (exclusionary rule focused on deterrence and culpability; attenuation doctrine discussed)
- Groh v. Ramirez, 540 U.S. 551 (2004) (strict particularity; warrant with missing attachments raises suppression concerns)
- United States v. Froman, 355 F.3d 882 (5th Cir. 2004) (magistrate's probable cause assessment and common-sense approach)
- United States v. Riccardi, 405 F.3d 852 (10th Cir. 2005) (good-faith consideration where affidavit limits search to relevant files)
- United States v. Otero, 563 F.3d 1127 (10th Cir. 2009) (assistance by prosecutors can support good-faith reliance)
- United States v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (probable-cause standard: fair probability of wrongdoing)