simple case we have here and a t f agent who gathered a lot of information talked to a lot of witnesses and certainly tried to put it all together unfortunately i would submit to you that  did not include lats connect the dots here agent her net did not talk to a single witness who saw tuireann a good woman with a gun anywhere more importantly he did not talk to a single witness that he knew based upon his experience to be a reliable witness the trail here went from first finding a stolen gun on richard mccormick then going back to the owner of that store and gun mauser to determine that it was in fact his gun it was a machine gun and it was properly registered to mr mauser then the there was an interview over brian white who claimed to be a friend of the mccormick and said that he wanted to but he couldn't afford the gun when it was offered to him then the trail went to a rusting sprang watson who in fact is the only witness who ever referenced torana goodwin at all and mr watson claimed to have brokered a deal between mr mccormick and mr tuireann a good one for the sale of this weapon that is the only mention at all of mr goodwin and the weapon mr notably mr watson never claimed to see the transaction happen never said that he saw a new or the witness toria no good one with a gun or that he knew that tory and a good one had that gun at his house finally the trail went to detective her curtain and figuring out where tuireann no good women lived and then with all of this information age and h statements do not support probable cause and they did not form a substantial basis in the district court's review of the magistrate's issuance of that affidavit even though he was an experience detective his training experience alone did not equate with probable cause to believe the turion a good woman was a phone in possession or probable cause to believe that the subject weapon was located in a store goodwin's house indeed the magistrate's duties interviewing a warrant application have a lot to deal with common sense and practicality but i would submit to you that no amount of practicality could put these factors together to relate enough to get probable cause to determine that torian a good one had a weapon and had this weapon in his house i would s informant who was named and talked to by the police so he brokered the sale of this machine gun well it was an odd it's not just a hunch is that somebody saying he bought with the weapon well it is more than yes judge it would be an inference but there was nothing ordinary course of events rely on i mean i think it has to be more than that because they would the police are bound to know and be able to test the credibility of that information beyond that one interview i don't that evidence or the record shows that agent heard that did not know or have any other contact with brian watson other than that interview so it was just that statement by and none reliable person was the only thing that the police relied on because this is his reliability as a an informant hasn't been tested and the law requires that but they'd never used him in another you know buster or any kind of other investigation where they could've said yes judge yes you can magistrate this guy is a reliable informant we've used them before in fact the only reliable informant mentioned in that affidavit was the fellow that set up the drug bust a drug bust with this brian watson that got him under arrest i think the police fell upon this information and yes the agent had a very good but that does not go that does not alleviate the police's responsibility to abide by the fourth amendment if the f a david is judged on what it does contain and not what it lacks is correct in the government suggests and as did this court in u s versus allen here the district court had to find that the affidavit fell short of providing a substantial basis to conclude that there was probable cause of the government claims that there is cross corroboration within the affidavit however i would submit to your honor's that the cross corroborated evidence had nothing to do with tuireann of goodwin having a gun but the corroborated evidence was only that the guns were stolen that the guns had been previously locked up and that the machine gun had intrinsic value these cross corroborated facts did not go to the heart of obtaining this or warrant for the arrest and conviction alternately of tuireann a good one for his possession of these weapons there was not a single witness that gave information that was known to be reliable in judge rogers that's what i'm trying to say there was not a single witness that saw turano purchased the gun or cause us a gun and not a single witness that saw any gun at torino good ones resonance now with that point i would note for the court that i do not feel that there was any linkage to the actual residence and under the law there has to be probable cause that the person  possession of the object or criminal tool and second that the object of criminal tool is in the particular place to be searched and here there was nobody who said that they even knew where t understand that these weapons do have value and that they're the true district court relied upon the fact that these valuable items are often club kept close to the persons who possess them however i would  it would just be as likely for a person in possession of a valuable machine gun to keep them in a clubhouse shed somebody else's house buried any other place not necessarily their residence and i don't believe that there's enough connection to have supported an affidavit or a warrant for this particular residence of tory on a good one i would request this court happy to answer any of the questions but i would submit that the district court did not have enough upon which to find probable cause and request the court to reverse the decision denying the motion to suppress thank you  for the united states may please the court i'm replacing a usa deskins who retired last week the district court properly concluded in this case that the magistrate has substantial basis for finding probable cause viewing the light in the film the evidence in the light most favorable to the government the record shows that the magistrate was reasonably exercising his discretion in finding probable cause in that the informant who as judge rogers noted is named kevin watson was reliable and provided a basis for finding probable cause that the information provided in the affidavit was not stale and that finally there was sufficient facts alleged in the affidavit to conclude that there was a nexus between the machine gun being sought and mr goodwin's residence i'd like to start with the reliability of mr watson under both gates and allen well aware the court looks at three factors veracity reliability and the basis of knowledge of an informant and all three of those factors weigh in favor of the probable cause finding in this case with respect to mr watson as an initial matter and again as you already alluded to judge rogers mr watson was not just mr watson's identity it was not just known to agent but his name was revealed in the affidavit itself and the naming of the informant as this court has recognized in two decisions issued just this year in kinston and high the naming of the informant attests to his or her  reliability and for recipe and goes to the fact that even just the naming of the informant can it ties be sufficient to find probable cause even absent any sort of independent  hand in hand with the naming of the informant is the fact that when the agent interviewed mr watson in the face to face interview the agent had the opportunity to grow old  yes your honor on october thirty first mr watson was implicated in the control by he made a statement at that time about buying guns from mr mccormick but that he got rid of those face to face interview at which point the agent can use that opportunity to assess his credibility and his veracity mr watson admits in a statement against his penal interests that he brokered that sale of the machine gun now as we know from harris a statement against penal interest weighs in favor another factor in favor of mr watson's credibility and also another aspect of the fact that it was face to face interview and again the naming of mr watson is that just by providing information to the police even regardless of whether it was a statement against his interest mr watson thereby exposed himself to potential penalties for providing false information in addition mr watson's basis of his knowledge is first hand knowledge as he was the one who brokered the sale for mccormick to good that again is another factor that this court looks upon favorably when assessing and known informants credibility again another factor contrary to what goodwin apply implies and there was sufficient  corroboration of mr watson statement even going beyond the fact that he's already a known and identified informant whether or not mr watson was able to place the machine gun in mr  goodwin's home there's sufficient evidence that shows that the at that the agent was actually able to connect the dots throughout the affidavit and that in turn the magistrate judge was able to see that connecting of the dots when he found his probable cause made his probable cause determination for example brian white in the in the statement taken by law enforcement brian white another known  identified informant makes the comment that mr mccormick e mailed him offering to sell to weapons machine gun and then another weapon i believe it was a pistol mr mccormack said that one  pistol was stolen so that is consistent with the fact that mr watson at least a couple weeks months later is saying that mr mccormick was in the business of selling weapons the description of the weapon and the uniqueness of the weapon which is a machine gun is consistent between mr white's statement and mr watson statement also the fact that it was stolen again i consistent and then i think what's important to the to highlight for the court about mr watson statement is the fact that he reports mr goodwin as saying goodwin intended to keep that weapon because of its uniqueness and presumably because of its value and we know that this is a valuable weapon not just from not just from mr white's statement when mccormick tells and this is worth nine to twelve thousand dollars i'll give it to you for fifteen hundred again connecting the dots a couple months perhaps have passed we're not sure of the exact time and now mr mccormick presumably gangle more desperate to get rid of this hot weapon has reduced its price so by the time watson brokers the sale the price is now five hundred dollars in cash plus cocaine all of those statements together and all those aspects of the case show that watson here is a proven reliable not a proven reliable in the sense of being used in past cases but as demonstrated the aspects of a reliable and credible informant i'd like to turn quickly to  issue which defense counsel touch briefly on here there's plenty of evidence in the affidavit and particularly when viewed in light of the case law that cited in our brief here that the evidence is far from stale and that the magistrate judge was properly exercising his discretion far from arbitrarily exercising his discretion in finding that there was probable cause that the machine gun would still be in good residence first we know from the spikes factors that there's the character of the crime and i believe in a case that i believe you were on in pritchett that the court has already noted that this is a continuing offense the possession under nine twenty two g and then the possession of an unregistered machine gun or continuing offenses so it's not similar to cases that which might be the distribution or the sale which might not necessarily  keep this gun it's unique it's cool to machine gun hard to get we know that we require special license that's in the affidavit it's worth a lot of money goodwin intends to keep that weapon and we also know that the maximum time period that goodwin's had this weapon at this point is just over three months assuming we know and to september third brian white received the offer of sale and then some point before december fifteenth watson brokered the sale for mccormick to goodwin so that's the maximum time period just over three months that's a lapse and that falls well within the boundaries set by this court in cases such as lancaster and also vander wheel a case that's not cited in our briefs your honor but that was issued just this past month on november thirteenth and the timeframe relevant to that case was seven months so here again we fall well within  prior case law and finally just to touch on one of the last issues that was raised for the last issue that was raised by goodwin is the nexus between the weapon where there in that case an f b i agent who specialized in financial crimes the court found it was reasonable for the lower court to rely on his opinion and conclusion about where evidence would be found just as the same here again also lookin fandor we'll case that was recently issued it's reasonable for the court to look to age and experience experienced agents determination that the machine gun will be found in the home as it's also recognized in the smith case and so your honour's in conclusion i would ask that you affirm the lower court's decision the district court properly concluded that the magistrate has substantial basis for finding probable cause given the reliability of the known named informant mr watson given that the information was far far from stale under this court's case law cited in our brief and finally that there was ample evidence of nexus between mr goodwin's residence and the fact that he was in possession of that firearm so i know i'm a little i have time left but if the court has no questions i would ask you to consider our brief witness this honorable court has held that were a person named to the magistrate to whose reliability an officer attest was some detail states that he has seen a particular crime and particular evidence in the recent past absence of any additional of the informants reliability courts insist and really they must insist that the f d a that contain substantial independent cooperation and of all the things that were corroborated nothing that mr watson