### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 10-40720 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. RAMIRO LOZANO, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:09-CR-825-1

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Ramiro Lozano appeals his conviction for two c o u nt s of p e r s u ading a minor to engage in sexually explicit conduct. Lozano argues that the d i s t rict court

e r r e d in denying his motion to suppress the evidence obtained pursuant to a search warrant because the supporting affi d avit was insufficient to support application of the g o o d

- f aith exception to the exclusionary rule and was insufficient to establish probable cause. Lozano contends that the affidavit was bare bones and did not contain sufficient facts and circumstances from which a U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D August 4, 2 011 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 , the cour t has d ete rm inedt hat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t for th in 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 10-40720 Document: 00511561824 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/04/2011No. 10-40720

magistrate could determine probable cause. He also contends that the affiant provided misleading information. We revie w factual findings on a motion to suppress for clear error and legal determinations de novo. United States v. Chavez , 281 F.3d 479, 483 (5th Cir. 2002). The good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule provides that if law enforcement officials ac t in objectively reasonable good-faith reliance upon a search warrant the evidence o b t a i n e d pursuant to the warrant is admissible

even if the affidavit on which the warrant was grounded was insufficient to establish probable cause. United States v. Shugart , 117 F.3d 838, 843 (5th Cir. 1997). However, the good-faith exception does not apply if the underlying affidavit is bare b o n e s or the affiant provided misleading information. United Stats v. Mays , 4 6 6 F .3d 335, 343 (5th Cir. 2006). A bare bones affidavit is one that contai n s “wholly conclusional statements [ ] which lack the facts and circumstances from which a magistrate can independently determine probable cause.” United States v. Sa tterwhite , 980 F.2d 317, 321 (5th Cir. 1992). In

r e vi e w ing whether there is sufficient information to support a warrant, we examine the totality of the circumstances. United States v. Fisher , 22 F.3d 574, 578 (5th Cir. 1994). The information in the affidavit s u p p o rting the challenged warrant provided facts sufficient for a determination of probable cause. The af f i ant detailed the circumstances of Lozano’s arrest and described relevant items in his possession giving rise to probable cause. Specifically, the affidavit noted that Lozano was found in possession of school iden t ification cards. He was also in
p ossession of numerous adult pornographic films, photographs of school

- a g e d children, and at least one photograph depi c t i n g an individual with exposed genitals. Additionally, the record does not support a finding that the affiant misled the magistrate. No statement in the affidavit is deliberately untruthful or made with a reckless disregard for the truth. See United States v. Alvarez , 127 F.3d
2 Case: 10-40720 Document: 00511561824 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/04/2011No. 10-40720

372, 373 (5th Cir. 1997). Moreover, the affiant brought the evidence referenced in the affi d avi t to the magistrate for viewing purposes. This conduct does not evidence an intent to mislead. Becau s e t h e affidavit was not misleading and provided detailed information from which a determination of probable cause cou ld be made, the district court did not err in concluding that the g o o d

- f aith exception to the exclusionary rule applied. See Shugart , 117 F.3d at 844. Therefore, we do not

c o n s i d e r wh e th e r th e af fidavit presented sufficient evide nc e to e s t ab li s h p rob ab l e
cause. See United States v. Cherna , 184 F.3d 403, 4 0 7 ( 5th Cir. 1999). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

3 Case: 10-40720 Document: 00511561824 Page: 3 Date Filed: 08/04/2011