to follow up on the chief question though doesn't the address get them there because here's here's the problem having with your argument and it's about tory search warrant i think the purpose is the package was headed there and so when the packages delivered and that is taken insi issue we're going to discussion about this but it's a different issue if they put the package back outside but once a package delivered and kept inside the home the police now have probable cause to believe there is contraband in the hall and isn't that sufficient for  yours yes i mean i guess my problem is this really all that probable cause requires is that there's a belief that there's contraband or something illegal in a particular place and you have that here i mean you do have a different case i think if for example you couldn't read the address label or somebody who was on the address label the next actually live in the home or something of that nature but it seems to me that that's an uphill battle for you to climb do you have a case it really shows us that there's more than that that's required no joke i'm going to move on to my second point of that first point which is that the trigger event never heard  the judge relied upon for the warrant but it's quite possible that the judge just simply said you know you don't need all that stuff i understand you're willing to do that and then issued the warrant and said all needs to be as transported inside and that gets back to judge benton's question that seems to be i mean if you look house and opened with the words marked return to sender on the package and it happened two minutes later right i mean it was very quick according to the record lessons in less than two minutes and so that seems to me to be your real argument unless i'm mistaken i mean the argument that your strongest argument which is that really come on the triggering condition itself was not sufficient because it didn't account for the possibility that you could take it inside and that could be delivered to the wrong a drastic or maybe it maybe they filled out the wrong address or they didn't really accept the packages they placed on immediately outside were did you make that argument to the district court yesterday and if that was an argument that was in the motions for us and that's also cited here what happened here is  but in this particular stage situation where the interest of the war was being executed postal inspector farmer was sort of the eyes on site he was monitoring the front door when he saw package go into that residence he immediately contacted his swat team for them to come to the house but at the same point time before the swat team of a law enforcement arrived at the house postal inspector farmer also saw that placed immediately back outside and he confirmed in his testimony that the package was marked return to sender and they were able to corroborate that that package and you just look at it that's not a sufficient triggering event it's got to be a big old trouper triggering event not a small mickey mouse triggering event right research that has been executed it's always been made to an occupant who except the livery either by an individual that signing the document or somebody else of the dollar sign on which is the closest case now course you're arguing from the other side you know kind of a negative inference but which is your closest case to this transporting being a triggering event vision there is no what's the closest to and i valued that trick in my question what's the what's the closest cases that are cited both parties both by us in the government or state versus here are united states sara and also united states versus jackson but each of those cases are factually distinguishable from this particular case because in each of those cases while in united states the sarah postal service worker did deliver a package to an individual the individual actually signed for the package accepted the package and took the package inside and that's not what happens what we have here is we have a package of waste outside of a residence and nobody but from that residence actually accepted the liver they picked up the package took it inside and immediately sent it back outside the market turns center and the contents of the package still remained in the package it was on the open but you agree but you agree that it we have a different case perhaps if the triggering condition says or it's transported inside and remains inside for an hour then you probably have a different case then you've sort of there's at least some implicit implicit acceptance but your argument would be a two minutes come on takes that long to go get a sharpie to mark return to sender so that doesn't any indicate any kind of acceptance of the package i think the time of the temporal proximity would also be warranted by what i actually heard of this particular case because the package there remained inside the house for an hour at that point based at least on what we know occurred here law enforcement would have interviewed all of that they would have executed they would have made their entry but what we have here in the facts of this case when the fact is that that was before law enforcement even arrived which it's my third point on this issue which you dress the potential for good faith correction and that law enforcement lack was right back outside the front door and that's where the law enforcement officers went to make entry so the packages blanket next to the right front door when they're standing around trying to force or for law enforcement to say we see the package well i didn't say they just said is i don't know if that matters whether they saw i didn't see it or whatever the point is is the triggering condition was satisfied for the for the anticipatory search warrant and the search warrant was not the trigger and it was not so out  that the officers would have had would have had or an objective belief that boy that this judge just mass stop there's just no way there's probable cause here to lead to a close call and so therefore it seems to me that the good faith exception would apply  respectfully disagree and so when i'm dealing with this issue here and looking at this when you have this this group of individuals and long and supposedly specter farmer makes this argument this affidavit but since all this if you have a judge and he's the point he understands what he represents the judge in order to get this out and those of that package is set back outside but there's no longer being in the house and that's what we're talking about the member privacy and that mr brown has with respect to that his right is violated with respect to the interest when is the choice of the condition is a choice that the magic judge makes based on the affidavit and that question is a question of probable cause does the condition that the master judge chose state probable cause that you're going to find contraband evidence instrumentalities a crime at the place to be searched here i've heard one thing i want to respond to on this point which is that there's no contraband in the house the affidavit actually made now not just a search for the contraband that was being sent the four hundred fifty six grams of meth but other things that are related to the drug trade affiance were likely to be there because the house was likely to be used for the receipt storage or sale of methamphetamine so includes u s currency other drugs so it's not just a matter of the country and doesn't make it into the house not from the perspective of there are other things they're looking for the well here's the problem i have to tell you i'm very troubled by the triggering condition because a package i received just three weeks ago would have satisfied the triggering condition i got a package where  address was written over and it listed my address and i did not identify the package my kids picked it up from outside they brought it inside they photographed it they sent it to me within three minutes i told them to write return to sender call fed ex and send it back under your theory of the case having my kids taken a package that doesn't even belong to me would give rise to probable cause even if three minutes later it was put out on the front stoop i just can't be right and i agree it's an hour two hours three hours but less than two minutes i just find that hard to believe that's that's right your honor but it's not a matter of the i mean the triggering condition didn't set out i guess of the question you're asking is  triggering condition that doesn't include an exception for something that's immediately placed back outside the house still stay probable cause yeah or account for the fact that it could be missed a liver her or whatever i mean just to i mean the mere act of bringing it in is not an acceptance of the package and in this case we have the fact that a but it's not a certainty question it's only reasonable so the we have four hundred fifty six grams of methamphetamines eleven dollars roughly being sent to a location it is true that that could have been mr acted too to an innocent person's house and that transportation by that person inside the house under the terms of this warrant is going to trigger a search of that house i still think that that gets you to probable cause people don't it is not the case that people are just mistakenly thinking there are eleven thousand dollars about them fed it means to that house of people who are likely to give that to that they will go slowly with me grabs is a close case right in saying because we're talking about these sufficiency of the triggering condition right i guess i have i have several cases but grubbs is a drug is greg's the only united state four i'm not here to shock you i'm here to try to learn something ok it's got to be one probable now the one two and three in your brief or in the supreme court's opinion right the quotation you have on twenty four of your brief it has a one two and three are those your one two and three of the supreme court's one two and three i think it's a supreme gorge one doing three it's on page ninety six of grabs in the us reports inside the premises i agree that you're ok and the third one says when the ward is executed ok now has a warrant already been executed as is the warrant not executed until it's outside the premises you see my literal approach do i think i understand your question your honor and i think that the facts i think that you have identified a factual issue which is that the package was placed back outside at the time the search took place when is the warrant executed that's right after that point but i don't think you know before you agree with me just to agree with me what do you think execution means of the war well i guess that the way this went down is that the package was transported inside and i believe it's at that point that officer postal inspector farmer ordered is  law enforcement were around there to to move into place now there was an issue getting inside the front door and so the question of when the warrant was executed in this case is a little tougher because in fact they couldn't get inside the house because a front door been reinforced was executed when  i can't i can't get inside the supreme court's head on what it means when it says executed in this context i i think that well let me put it to you to you this way your honor the affidavit in this case didn't just say we're looking for the four hundred fifty six grams of methamphetamine that are now back it is said because we know that four hundred fifty six grams of methamphetamine are destined to that location we expect we're going to find other things that are related to the drug trade inside that residence so is the is the package located inside the residence at the time that the warrant is executed yes if executed means the search started no if executed means at the time the search ended but there's other things contraband instrumentalities or crime that we're looking for inside the residence that judge worth found probable cause that we would find in there but the word doesn't say all that i mean the warrant doesn't say talk about suspicious behavior which probably would give you your probable cause like for instance them casing the neighborhood it doesn't say that you know you're really looking for other things what is really a saying is once that's taken inside you have you know you have the cops that have a reason to believe that contraband will be found in the residence that's a problem having is the things you're saying are true but none of it's all the different stuff similar things that describe controlled substances paraphernalia records receipts letters telephone bills photographs things like that so i think that the measure judge made a decision about what that the triggering condition was going to be in this case he was thinking not just about the package being physically located inside the house that we can go see the back of what we already know as methamphetamine and but the fact that the house is being used for the receipt storage sale of methamphetamine and we're going to likely find other evidence that's related to me the other problem you have with that of course is then presumably you would have had probable cause even before the package was taken in right you didn't even need an anticipatory search warrant because if he believed that things were going to be found inside there was all but ready probable cause one would think but i don't think that's what he actually found i mean he did an anticipatory search warrant that's right your honor and i think that that's a concern i understand but it's also a concern that the court in rubs had to grapple with also and said basically look we understand sending a package with contraband to a location gets you almost all the way there what you need is one more thing and one more thing is that somebody doesn't somebody doesn't just leave it there there's some connection between someone associated with the house and that package here were said i find probable cause that that connection can be satisfied by someone an adult transporting you inside the house could you address good faith i don't want to i don't want to run out of  time because i think that might save you here or save the government here the good faith exception and first of all i'm wondering if you've argued that consistently that it's so that's before us and secondly whether you think it applies i do think we've argued it consistently i think it's in our brief and i i do think it applies here that and it's it's in that way that the split between the factual question of whether the triggering condition actually occurred which i think he carried it across a threshold that happened in the match just choice of the triggering condition really comes into play because that's a problem and if the magistrate messed up if the magistrate was wrong it's probable cause determination and that's not a reason to do to suppress the evidence unless one of the similar warrant to the one that we're dealing with here and there are a handful of other cases that have similar conditions such as delivered and accepted which is tagged bearing to any other occupant shorty successfully delivered taken inside the residence which is jackson so i think that a reasonable officer looking at this warrant the condition that the magistrate judge chose to believe that there was probable cause and that's why i think that leon's application here is straightforward i think you may be right the one thing that gives me pause is the fact that the fact that what we've been talking about previously which is the package was sitting outside by the time they entered the residence we can talk about execution we could debate that but by the time they entered the residence the packet was back outside what's the government's response that under good faith exception on the analysis well i don't think that the i mean the officers are looking at the war and they're saying how do i decide when the condition is satisfied it says it doesn't say how could she be taken inside and remain  adult that someone then later as has happened in other cases leaves with the package or hands it off there's a case where outside of the house even the warrant said has to be received by someone inside the residence they were thank you which isn't directly on with your with yeah beyond question but i think that because i think the answer is if you're trying to execute the warrant you off looking at the warrant it says a dog carr i think so either just going to have reading your summary of it anticipatory search is and of course that they approve it but is there anything else in grabs that controls in this case for your against you well i would say this your honor the question that there are that question demands for judges to consider that the weight decides whether contraband will be there and the probability that the event will occur those are both things that are decided on a probable cause standard that's what he's got to that's what he's got to be thinking about it's still the position of mr brown that law enforcement lacked objective reason to believe to be able to execute that search because that package had been fact outside the house the drugs were in the package still sealed it was perfectly visible  for law enforcement to enter that residence there has to be some type of reasonable belief that after being a still in the car it's a well let me interrupt you of course i did about the where the premises and the time frame the when and with the government under gr grabs prefaces all that with it is now a probable they mean to the magistrate judge in fact they say they require the magistrate to determine it is now probable that in a later time these other two are likely to happen so are we dealing here only with the real low level of probability of probable cause i'm sorry i don't know how ok that's kind of the issue and grabs is can you deal with the says it's now probable they put that is one that contraband will be on the premises that's two three when it's warrant so there is that becoming a probability of a probability when we're looking at the first element that it's now probable that's looking at what the man is just looking at at that point time based not only on what he's looking at but he's relying on the affidavits presented to him by the postal inspector and so his determination probable cause is based on what's represented in that particular affidavit that affidavit is making assumptions that actually never occurred at law for some actually followed the affidavit had done what i was told specter farmer represented to the judge was going to happen then we would be dealing with the issue that you have alluded to when you're talking about the contraband is going to be on the premises that's what i was getting at through that didn't happen either the contraband wasn't ever inside that it was does not inside the house at the time was orson executed their warrant was in fact  outside the residence and we were talking about execution this is before law enforcement even made themselves even made their way onto the property itself and so that package is already back outside so it's again our position that a hear these cases today i believe very complete