Court Opinion

ID: 9797791
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 04:29:29.388463+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:57:40.378293
License: Public Domain

PICKARD, Judge (specially concurring). {37} The majority opinion considers it significant that the events occurring during the week prior to the search provided additional reason to believe that the gun would still be located at Defendant’s home. While I agree with that analysis, I do not believe that such facts were necessary to avoid a determination of staleness. As the Court indicated in Pargas, guns are durable goods that a magistrate might expect would still be useful to the owner a month or several months after a particular incident. There is nothing in this case to suggest that Defendant would have rid himself of the gun. Moreover, even without the information concerning the week prior to the search, there is everything to suggest that Defendant would still have it. Accordingly, I have signed the opinion and fully concur in it. I write separately to indicate that I would affirm even without these additional facts.