Opinion ID: 1465501
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The affidavit contained an adequate foundation to support issuance of the search warrant.

Text: Statements in an affidavit supporting a search warrant application directed toward the behavior of a particular class of persons must be supported by a foundation which shows that the person subject to the search is a member of the class. United States v. Weber, 923 F.2d 1338, 1345 (9th Cir.1991), as amended. In the present case, there was ample information in the affidavit to support the notion that Banks was engaging in the production and trade of images depicting minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct, including evidence of the transmission of such images between Banks and a convicted sex offender in Canada. Thus, to the extent Banks argues that the affidavit failed to set forth the proper foundation for later assumptions about pedophiles, the requirements of Weber were met. Further, to the extent that Banks argues that the contested sections of the affidavit were required to be supported by expert opinion, he is incorrect. The contested sections provided background information about how pedophiles act in the digital age, how law enforcement generally conducts searches of computers, and what likely steps would be taken to search a computer. None of these topics is so esoteric as to require expert explanation to be understood. Additionally, at the outset of the affidavit, Agent Martin explained that she has been investigating the sexual exploitation of children since 1998 and has attended training seminars and classes related to conducting these types of investigations. Her extensive background was sufficient to support the generalized statements provided in the first three sections of the affidavit. Finally, to the extent Banks argues that Agent Martin's failure to specifically include the source of her information in each section renders the affidavit insufficient to create probable cause, the argument fails because Banks is unable to demonstrate that any omission was material or that, when supplemented with the omitted information, [the affidavit] would be insufficient to support a probable cause finding. United States v. Jawara, 474 F.3d 565, 582 (9th Cir.2007), as amended (citation omitted).