## Facts

- Jerry Paull was a 65-year-old former minister who suffered from Type I diabetes, Meniere’s disease causing vertigo, coronary artery disease, and osteoporosis.
- Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents learned of Paull’s online activity connected to child-pornography websites and sought a federal warrant to search his residence.
- The warrant affidavit relied on subscription/payment information tied to known child-pornography sites and the affiant agent’s training and experience regarding how such material is obtained and kept.
- Agents executed the warrant at Paull’s home in Amherst, Ohio and found a garbage can in the garage containing bundled printed child-pornography images, along with computer disks, CDs, and numerous videotapes.
- The seized collection totaled more than 3,700 images, not counting the videotapes.
- Paull confessed to possessing child pornography and later entered a conditional guilty plea to four counts of knowing possession of child pornography under 18 U.S.C. § 2252 et seq., preserving appellate review of specified pretrial rulings.
- Before the plea, Paull moved to suppress the seized evidence and his statements (raising Fourth Amendment and Miranda/voluntariness claims) and moved to dismiss the indictment on constitutional grounds (including vagueness and fair-trial arguments). The district court denied those motions.
- The plea agreement stipulated to a total offense level of 30, including Guideline adjustments for images of a prepubescent minor, images depicting sadistic/masochistic conduct, use of a computer, and possession of more than 600 images.
- The presentence report recommended additional upward adjustments for obstruction of justice and a pattern of activity involving the sexual abuse of a minor, resulting in an offense level of 37 and an advisory range of 210 to 262 months.
- At sentencing, Paull sought a below-range sentence based on age, serious medical problems, rehabilitation efforts (including participation in a sex-addiction group), and his history of being sexually abused as a child.
- The district court considered those mitigating points but declined to vary downward; it also considered whether an upward variance was warranted based on the nature and volume of the material and Paull’s lack of empathy for victims.
- The court imposed a within-range sentence of 210 months’ imprisonment.

## Issues

1. Whether the search-warrant affidavit established probable cause (including whether the information was stale) and, if not, whether the Leon good-faith exception barred suppression.
2. Whether Paull’s confession should have been suppressed because Miranda warnings were not properly given or because the statements were involuntary.
3. Whether the child-pornography possession statute and indictment were unconstitutional, including as void for vagueness or as denying a fair trial.
4. Whether the district court erred in applying Guideline upward adjustments (including obstruction of justice and a pattern of sexual abuse of a minor) and whether the 210-month sentence was substantively unreasonable under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

## Decision

- The Sixth Circuit affirmed the denial of suppression of the physical evidence, concluding the affidavit supported probable cause to search Paull’s residence and rejecting the staleness challenge given the nature of child-pornography collection and retention.
- The court further held that, even if probable cause were a close question, suppression was not warranted because officers reasonably relied on the warrant under United States v. Leon.
- The court affirmed the denial of suppression of Paull’s statements, deferring to the district court’s credibility findings and concluding the confession was voluntary and not obtained in violation of Miranda.
- The court rejected Paull’s constitutional challenges to the statute and indictment, including his vagueness and fair-trial arguments.
- The court upheld the Guideline calculations, including the obstruction-of-justice and pattern-of-activity upward adjustments, finding no clear error in the supporting factual findings.
- The court held the 210-month sentence, at the bottom of the advisory range, was substantively reasonable because the district court considered Paull’s mitigating circumstances but reasonably weighed the seriousness of the offense, the harm to victims, and other § 3553(a) factors.

## Legal Principles

- A search warrant is supported by probable cause when the affidavit provides a substantial basis to believe evidence of a crime will be found at the place to be searched; in child-pornography cases, older information may still support probable cause because collectors often keep material for extended periods.
- Under United States v. Leon, evidence obtained pursuant to a warrant will not be suppressed when officers reasonably rely on the warrant, unless the affidavit is so deficient that reliance is objectively unreasonable.
- Appellate courts generally defer to district-court credibility determinations in resolving Miranda and voluntariness disputes; a confession is admissible absent coercion, threats, or improper promises.
- A statute is not void for vagueness as applied when it gives ordinary people fair notice of the prohibited conduct and does not invite arbitrary enforcement; knowing possession of child pornography falls within clearly defined prohibitions.
- Guideline factfinding supporting offense-level adjustments is reviewed for clear error; the overall sentence is reviewed for reasonableness under an abuse-of-discretion standard, and a within-range sentence may be treated as presumptively reasonable when the court meaningfully considers § 3553(a).

## Conclusion

The Sixth Circuit affirmed Paull’s conviction and 210-month sentence, holding that the search warrant was valid (and alternatively protected by good-faith reliance), the confession was admissible, the statute and indictment withstood constitutional attack, the district court did not clearly err in applying the disputed Guideline upward adjustments, and the within-range sentence was not greater than necessary under § 3553(a) despite Paull’s age, medical conditions, and other mitigating arguments.


United States v. Paull, 551 F.3d 516 (2009)