Blazevich

MEMORANDUM

Defendant Paul Blazevieh appeals his conviction and sentence for transporting, shipping, and possessing child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252 (a)(1), 2252(a)(4)(B), and 2. The government cross-appealed Blazevich’s sentence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. The facts in this case are well-known to the parties and will not be repeated here.

The district court correctly concluded that the warrant in this case was not unconstitutionally overbroad because it was impossible to describe with more specificity the items to be seized United States v. Hay, 231 F.3d 630, 637-38 (9th Cir.2000); United States v. Lacy, 119 F.3d 742, 746-47 (9th Cir.1997). As the district court observed, the government suspected Blazevich possessed a large number of images, the government did not know where the images were stored, and the government represented that significant amounts of time and expertise, and a controlled environment, would be necessary to properly analyze the evidence seized.

The district court also correctly denied Blazevich’s motion to suppress evidence seized during the search. The Customs Agents had probable cause to search the…