around three minutes to get to the kind of get into the case and then at around three minute mark or so i will either ask a question or if i am not ready to ask  conviction and the tainted evidence by raising view inevitable discovery and plain view both of those efforts fail because in the defense position those issues were those are below but even if we assume that they were preserved this court still must overturn the district court's ruling because the government cannot pass the test set forth in united states versus awesome i'm specifically with beginning st your honor with the matter as to whether or not exigent circumstances existed the government must prove credible and specific information must provide credible and specific information that someone is at a particular home and that that person is in need of immediate aid and that also is from the united states versus martinez in doing so the officer must be able to point in this is really the crux of the exigent circumstances argument the officer must be able to point to specific and articulable facts which taken for us all inferences there from those facts reasonably warrant the intrusion and this is particularly important in this case because when you're talking about court stated that the officers had information on several different subjects that gave them pause one that cartels might be involved and based on the way the cartels treat individuals such as these who are seeking has never provided any evidence that would connect the cartels to this case without that nexus there's simply guessing or hypothesizing as to what may have occurred or what could have possibly have probable cause for a search of the home we excised spi statement about the state and the ammunition why wasn't there sufficient reason to believe that there might be evidence of criminal activity contained in the home on a cell phone on an i pad on a computer you know it looks like mr mr moore ran his trucking obviously your home is can be the place where people need to reach you with relation to your work but in terms of the criminal activity there is nothing that connects the actual act of bravery elliot in to his home when you're on hold it don't don't you think it's likely that the authorities might find a cell phone or a computer that used for these activities inside the home at it's probably very likely but that's not really the issue as i see it here where the issue i see as i see it is if they can connect via legal activity to those objects as your honor knows when you're looking at a particular object that a search warrant there has to be a connection between that object simply everybody has by simply saying that we may find peace in the home that it doesn't really do much for the core i would if i had to hazard a guess i would say that every person on this call has a cell phone most of us have computers or laptop search or tablets which we also use a whole lot of us do our banking electronically and use our laptops intended the voices for those activities as well so when you just simply stating that those objects may exist that applies to just about everybody in order for more actually for the affidavit this is to supply probable cause there has to be a nexus between the criminal activity and the object itself not and court concluded that was more likely than not the drug dealers would keep them to their activities in the home how would how would you distinguish this case from fancy well correctly i'm not i'm not sure i do but i know there have been other cases of well that have talked about the difference between the uniqueness of drug cases themselves and if it sanchez was a drug case and perhaps  i was i was just at that case is different because of the nature of drug dealing people often operate out of their homes they don't have enough they don't frequently don't have an office depending on on how high up in the drug trafficking scale you are so it would be more likely in a drug trafficking case that something might be found at somebody's home however in this case mr morris primary place of business is in the cab of his truck that's where his business affidavit outlining why the officers thought that mr moore out might have any of this information at home no your honour's just know your honor beyond the typical kind of based on information and belief or training experience drug trafficker the people who smuggle jews phones beyond that type of language there is nothing nothing specific that would connect those objects to government in re as the court and the law enforcement had actual proof that the drug activity that was going on the location that the people who were involved in that activity actually kept records of their home so they had that nexus in the other case of the government side if there were witnesses co defendants and telephone records which connected that individuals who with the onus of the illegal activity the government doesn't have that in this case or we think that a case is more directly on point for what it's worth it's not from our circuits from the d c circuit but that would be the griffith case where the court found that the language that was used in that affidavit regarding cell phones very a david did not suffice and would not carry the day to save the warrant because the affidavit showed no connection between the individual and the cellphone that they saw there was no indication that the phone calls had been made  between any of the individuals involved in the crime on the cell phone there been no text messages and indeed no one and even actually even seen the trend in that case with the cell phone at all and that's very similar to the case that we have here everyone has those items we can't simply open the door to search the most guarded location and th amendment search prints because someone could someone has a cell phone that's not enough there has to be a connection between the cell phone and the criminal activity some may be getting phone records that indicate that mr moore was taking a receiving phone calls related to a criminal activity on a cell phone that happens frequently it happens all the time an  t and the situation the government and the affidavit just have no connection beyond beyond this kind of general this matter of this just simply no connection in the affidavit with the excised information that would actually connect any of those objects was very general common objects to mr moore and to the crime that he's accused of and as far as exigent circumstances go  all evidence found in his home must be suppressed including the firearms and ammunition seized during the later execution of the search warrant the agents initial sweep of lawful because agents had an objective leave reasonable basis to believe that migrants in need of emergency aid may have been in the home but even setting aside the only two pieces of information gleaned during the sweep the gun safe and ammunition cases that were spotted by a gents there was overwhelming evidence to establish probable cause for a search warrant of morris home to search for evidence of alien smuggling because the search warrant would have issued even without the information from the sleep and the firearms and ammunition would have inevitably been found the court should affirm the district court's denial of mr morris suppression motion take it out of the mind run of the really you know just about every other tech crime certainly cell phone records can be used for an offense purposes we all use these items every day but here are the situation is different because here we have an agent ice experienced a agent stating that based on his knowledge of the experience alien smugglers specifically use these type of items for purposes of alien smuggling to arrange and conduct business as well as to keep records use the banking system for transfers and to use what tronic devices to store communications photographs videos all of those types of items and the importance of these records of is clear from the facts of this case and it's you have individuals that have to coordinate getting payment from these individuals getting the strategic locations it's a much more complicated enterprise and just exchanging money for drugs and the drug trafficking caves and so it's essential and  reasonable to believe that drug alien smugglers will keep some sort of records or have some sort of communications that allowed them to set up this transaction and to factual ated and to keep track of who's paid and who hasn't paid so that the inherent alien smuggling enterprise itself supports the reasonable belief that there would be evidence of alien smuggling in things like electronic devices in lodgers and that they would be in his home in the context of drug smuggling cases this court has repeatedly found that it's reasonable to believe that this sort of evidence is stored in the home mr moore our focus is on some of the cases in which there's factual the means of distinguishing factually but in this case and many of these cases the court is finding repeatedly that it's reasonable to assume that certain types of evidence would be kept out of defendant's residence and the types of evidence identified in the affidavit here are the types of evidence that would reasonably be kept in the home on top of that we have the fact that mr moore after completing the alien smuggling trip goes to wal mart and picks up some parents or kids and then comes directly home so i'm mr moore is alleging that you know that the truck itself was the only basis for is his business but it's reasonable for agents to believe that given that there is no rd location there's no office there is no you know alternative location where any records would be kept that there would be records or communications or other information related to the alien smuggling enterprise that would be stored in his home which you can i jump in here with a question could get there they did what we do now is what is in the record is surveillance video that documents mr mora leaving the truck in the wal mart going inside the wal mart there's various surveillance videos from inside the mall mart where he's conducting shopping cargo behind it albertson store and i responded to that and i later discovered you know sometime later that the truck was parked in a wal mart parking lot and i examined the truck and it was empty and there was a bottle of urine and but other than that that there was no evidence of any humans being in the truck and then the rest of my affidavit is based on my own experience and not the specific circumstances of this case and i say you know investigated many human trafficking chases and in my experience you know human traffickers use cell phones and they also use computers and they sometimes are often keep records and in my experience they'll keep these records in their home but i make no specific allegations about defendant keeping these kind of records all those to get you in the hall i think in this case they are because we have the boilerplate allegations combined with the nature of this alien smuggling at a price the scope of the thirty to sixty individuals so  speculating they were throwing a number out isn't that right yes they are absolutely estimating i mean thirty to sixty is a large range but but we know that this isn't you know this is sent to people in the back of a truck where perhaps you could you could and coordinate and  arrange for payment all of that without any record trail you have someone is estimating an eyewitness who seeing thirty to sixty individuals approximately exiting the back of the truck and so that i think combined with the agency experience that alien smugglers do generally keep records and here you have an operation of that scope it's reasonable to believe that that there would be some sort of records or some sort of communication to enable that sort of operation to smuggled migrants actually reach their destination and so it was just highly unusual agents said they had never seen this before where a smuggler drops off individuals short of their final destination most of the aliens weren't going to places other than albuquerque they didn't even know they were being dropped off in albuquerque or new mexico they didn't have any means to reach their final destination so it was extremely odd given that that might actually impact the smiles ability to financially benefit from this operation if these individuals challenging that and then on top of that you have the in the training and experience of agents that have found that alien smugglers do keep records and that and the case of this court showing that it's reasonable to believe that those sort of records cell phones electronic devices are kept in the home and this is even more compelling than a drug trafficking case where this court is regularly found that these are the type of things that could be found in homes and so i believe i have another one so i guess my head to my mind is on the exigent circumstances and my question on that is if the idea is that the officers were worried that there were people in danger in the home and that they went in went through the hallway and went into the hall because they were concerned about safety of the people inside why did they wait for mr moore and to come home why didn't they go directly to the door and knock i think some of that might be answered in terms of the timeline and if they're arriving at the home at one thousand and thirty two and mr or more as a writing at and thirty six we're talking about events occurring in rapid succession and i do believe that the agents were also giving it some hard thought and terms of whether or not they should go into the home and whether or not that was appropriate under the circumstances they reach out to the u s attorney's office to confer with them and get legal advice on whether or not they should enter the home but ultimately they testified that they had concerns regarding the safety of individuals that may be in the home and that those chumps their concern about the impact that that might have on the case subsequently so the agents did actually relatively quickly but they at the same time they didn't do so recklessly they gave some thought to whether or not this was appropriate and decided that the risk was such that they they did not conduct any investigation on their own to determine whether or not there was in fact someone injured inside the house they did not come a door that in looking in any windows although that might have been a problem as well from the fence for effect but in any event they didn't know additional research to determine if someone was inside the house or injured inside the house and to take it a step further as i said when mr morris does get home they arrest mr moore ask him a few questions and then they proceed to ask his wife a number of questions and one of those questions is whether or not they can search the house she says no no you cannot search the house and it's only after that moment that she says no you can't enter my house that the notion of exigent circumstances comes up and so i would ask the court  what happened in between the time that the officers a rose at the location at mr morice house did not search his house and not speak to anyone is not conducting the other investigation whether or not someone was injured and then go on to speak with miss moore  without mentioning whether anyone else was in the house other than or her son she knew that if anyone else is now she said no only after that conversation does exigent circumstances become important and it's at that point that my understanding from the discovery and from the other places but where's the there is no evidence actually talking about what the scope of this operation is so that is speculation of my time is up yonder so i thank you for your time your questions thank you counsel i appreciate both of your arguments the case