United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT September 13, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-41203
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JOSEPH MCGAUGHEY,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
Case No. 6:04-CR-90-ALL
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and REAVLEY, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appellant McGaughey pled guilty to possession of child
pornography and was sentenced to twenty-one months imprisonment
subject to his right to appeal the district court’s denial of his
motion to suppress evidence seized from his home. He argues that
the search warrant was supported by a “bare bones” affidavit and
that the Government failed to corroborate two anonymous tips.
The good faith exception to the exclusionary rule
provides that “evidence obtained by officers in objectively
reasonable good-faith reliance upon a search warrant is admissible,
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
even though the affidavit on which the warrant was based was
insufficient to establish probable cause.” United States v.
Satterwhite, 980 F.2d 317, 320 (5th Cir. 1992); see also United
States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 104 S. Ct. 3405 (1984). The
exception will not apply, however, to a “bare bones” affidavit,
that is, an affidavit “so deficient in demonstrating probable cause
that it renders an officer’s belief [in the existence of probable
cause] completely unreasonable.” United States v. Cisneros,
112 F.3d 1272, 1278 (5th Cir. 1997). Such an affidavit is “based
upon conclusory statements,” and lacks “facts and circumstances
from which a magistrate can independently determine probable
cause.” United States v. Pofahl, 990 F.2d 1456, 1474 n.18 (5th
Cir. 1993).
In this case, the search warrant was not supported by a
“bare bones” affidavit because the citizen informants did not
provide untrustworthy information and the police sufficiently
corroborated the information. The informants independently
provided the police with firsthand knowledge of McGaughey’s name,
address, and place of work, and the police verified the accuracy of
this information before seeking the warrant. Both informants told
similar, detailed stories of McGaughey showing child pornography to
visitors in his home, and finally, the police observed McGaughey’s
association with a known possessor of child pornography at his
home. Therefore, the affidavit supporting the warrant was not
“bare bones,” and we AFFIRM the denial of the motion to suppress.
2
AFFIRMED.
3