United States v. McLellan
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 11588
| 1st Cir. | 2015Background
- In Dec. 2009 an FBI agent on Gigatribe downloaded a child‑pornography image file from user "a35scott," and traced the source IP to a Verizon account registered to Darryl J. St. Yves at 180 High Street, Taunton, MA.
- The FBI confirmed St. Yves lived at that address and obtained a warrant for the residence on Feb. 11, 2010; the affidavit did not mention earlier (2008–2009) investigative links of "a35scott" to other IPs/households.
- Agents executed the warrant Feb. 19, 2010; occupants included St. Yves (co‑owner) and appellant David McLellan, who had rented a room there since about Dec. 1, 2009.
- Officers searched the entire single‑family house, seized electronics from McLellan’s bedroom, and forensics later revealed >6.3 million child‑pornography files and files showing McLellan abusing an infant.
- McLellan moved to suppress the evidence and requested a Franks hearing, arguing the affidavit omitted material facts making the probable‑cause showing stale; the district court denied both requests.
- McLellan pleaded guilty reserving appeal; the First Circuit affirmed, rejecting both the Franks and particularity/multi‑unit challenges.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (McLellan) | Defendant's Argument (Government) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a Franks hearing was required for alleged omissions in the warrant affidavit | Affidavit omitted prior links tying "a35scott" to other IPs/households (2008–09), which would show the Gigatribe December 1, 2009 download was stale by Feb. 2010 and negate probable cause | Omitted information was ambiguous and immaterial to the magistrate’s probable‑cause determination; December 1 trace to 180 High St. and corroboration efforts supported probable cause | Denied: omitted facts would not have negated probable cause; no entitlement to Franks hearing |
| Whether the warrant was insufficiently particular because 180 High St. was a multi‑unit dwelling and the search of McLellan’s room exceeded the warrant | The house was a multi‑unit dwelling; warrant for entire address thus impermissibly vague as to McLellan’s separate room | District court found 180 High St. a single‑family residence (shared common areas, no separate entrance/mailboxes); warrant for whole dwelling permissible; facts discovered on entry pointed toward McLellan | Denied: dwelling was single‑family; search of McLellan’s room lawful |
Key Cases Cited
- Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978) (establishes hearing procedure when affidavit contains intentional or reckless falsehoods or omissions that are material to probable cause)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (probable cause in warrant affidavits is evaluated under a totality‑of‑the‑circumstances, practical‑commonsense standard)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984) (good‑faith exception to the exclusionary rule for warrants later found invalid)
- United States v. Gifford, 727 F.3d 92 (1st Cir. 2013) (presumption of validity for affidavits; standards for Franks inquiries)
- United States v. Rigaud, 684 F.3d 169 (1st Cir. 2012) (Franks two‑part preliminary showing and materiality requirement for omissions)
- United States v. Morales‑Aldahondo, 524 F.3d 115 (1st Cir. 2008) (child‑pornography investigations: collectors typically retain material long term; staleness analysis)