AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The case involves the Defendant, James Henz, who was charged with possession of child pornography following reports from Tumblr and Google to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC). These reports indicated that a user had posted child pornography on both internet platforms. A search warrant was issued based on these reports, and during the search of the Defendant's home, law enforcement recovered electronic devices containing images of child pornography. The Defendant admitted to possessing child pornography and operating the reported usernames (paras 2-4).

Procedural History

• District Court of Bernalillo County: Granted Defendant's motion to suppress evidence found in the search of his home, arguing the search warrant was not supported by probable cause (para 1).

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Appellant (State of New Mexico): Argued that the district court erred in finding the search warrant was not supported by probable cause, contending that Tumblr and Google are credible sources, their information was reliable, and the affidavit provided a substantial basis for the issuing court to conclude that a search would uncover evidence of child pornography (para 6).
• Defendant-Appellee (James B. Henz): Argued that the affidavit failed to establish probable cause because it did not include any description of the relevant images from which an issuing court could conclude that a violation of the child pornography statute occurred. Additionally, raised an argument that the children’s court has exclusive jurisdiction of the case because he was seventeen years old when law enforcement received the first tip from Tumblr (para 6).

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in reversing the issuing court’s probable cause determination and granting Defendant’s motion to suppress because the search warrant was supported by probable cause.
• Whether the children’s court has exclusive jurisdiction over the case due to the Defendant's age at the time of the alleged offense (paras 6, 30).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals reversed the district court's grant of Defendant's motion to suppress and remanded for proceedings consistent with the opinion (para 33).

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, per Chief Judge Hanisee, with Judges Duffy and Yohalem concurring, found that:
  Tumblr and Google functioned as credible hearsay sources who gathered their reported information in a reliable fashion, akin to identified citizen informants, due to their federal reporting obligations (paras 11-16).
  The affidavit provided a substantial basis for the issuing court to conclude that a search of Defendant’s home would uncover evidence of child pornography, as it contained sufficiently specific descriptions of the images reported by Tumblr and corroborated by Google (paras 17-25).
  The district court erred in requiring the affidavit to include either sufficient description of the posted images or verification that the affiant independently viewed the images to conclude they violated the child pornography statute. The Court of Appeals held that the affidavit, as a whole, provided a substantial basis to support a finding of probable cause (paras 26-28).
  The jurisdiction of the case properly rests in the district court, not the children’s court, as the Defendant was charged with committing an act of possession of child pornography after he turned eighteen (paras 30-32).