United States v. Morales-Aldahondo

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that three-year delay between acquisition of child pornography and application for warrant did not render supporting information stale since “customers of child pornography sites do not quickly dispose of their cache”
• holding that three-year-old information was not stale in light of agent's testimony that \a person who uses a computer to access child pornography is likely to use his computer both to augment and to store the collected images\
• holding the warrant’s information was not stale where 'there was a three-year lapse between the defendant’s purchase of child pornography and the warrant application
• explaining that part of the Government’s “full presentation” of its case included “the presentation of a sample of images, and the expert’s detailed description of how they were organized”
• finding that a three-year delay did not render information stale
• admitting images even though the defendant offered to stipulate that the images contained child pornography and the defendant did not contest the knowledge element of the crime

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).