Page:United States v. Morton (19-10842) (2021) Opinion.pdf/9

 but they must not turn a blind eye to details that do not support probable cause for the particular crime. Bigford v. Taylor, 834 F.2d 1213, 1218 (5th Cir. 1988) (explaining that officers may not “disregard facts tending to dissipate probable cause”).

Here, Trooper Blue supplied two facts to provide probable cause to search the images on Morton’s phones. First, Morton was found with less than two ounces of marijuana, a pipe, and sixteen pills that Morton stated were ecstasy. Second, based on Trooper Blue’s training and experience, “criminals often take photographs of co-conspirators as well as illicit drugs and currency derived from the sale of illicit drugs.” This background led Trooper Blue to assert that “photograph images stored in the cellular telephone may identify other co-conspirators and show images of illicit drugs and currency derived from the sale of illicit drugs.” These photographs would, in turn, be evidence of “other criminal activity … in furtherance of narcotics trafficking” and Morton’s drug possession crimes. The search warrant is thus expanded to seek information of an alleged narcotics trafficking conspiracy based solely on Morton’s arrest for, and evidence of, simple drug possession.

The syllogism that Trooper Blue offers to gain access to Morton’s photographs does not provide adequate grounds for the extensive search. In