The reviewing court recognizes that the issuing judge may “draw common-sense and reasonable inferences from the facts and circumstances set forth in an affidavit.” State v. Brennan, 674 N.W.2d 200, 204 (Minn.App.2004) (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. Apr. 20, 2004).

The reviewing court recognizes that the issuing judge may "draw common-sense and reasonable inferences from the facts and circumstances set forth in an affidavit." State v. Brennan, 674 N.W.2d 200, 204 (Minn. App. 2004) (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. Apr. 20, 2004).

And a police officer's training and experience is a proper factor to consider in making a probable-cause determination. State v. Brennan, 674 N.W.2d 200, 204 (Minn.App. 2004) (concluding that probable cause to search a house for evidence of child pornography exists when the totality of the circumstances, including the training and experience of the affiant and the nature of the crime, establishes a fair probability that child pornography will be found in the house), review denied (Minn. Apr. 20, 2004); State v. Miller, 666 N.W.2d 703, 714 (Minn. 2003).

Although these images may not rise to the level of child pornography — a question that is not before us — the similarities between this case and child pornography prosecutions cannot escape us. "[V]iewing and possessing child pornography is, by its nature, a solitary and secretive crime." State v. Brennan, 674 N.W.2d 200, 206 (Minn.Ct.App. 2004). We observe that the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has held, in the context of a federal child pornography statute, that visual depictions of clothed genitalia may fall within the meaning of "'lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area,'" and thereby qualify as child pornography.

The nexus factors "include the nature of the crime, the nature of the items sought, the extent of the suspect's opportunity for concealment, and the normal inferences as to where the suspect would normally keep the items." State v. Brennan, 674 N.W.2d 200, 204 (Minn.App. 2004) (quotation omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Apr. 20, 2004). A district court deciding whether to issue a search warrant may consider "[i]nformation linking the crime to the place to be searched and the freshness of the information[.]"

And this court has recognized that "viewing and possessing child pornography is, by its nature, a solitary and secretive crime" and thus, based on an affiant's training and experience, "the court could reasonably draw an inference that the suspect would keep the illicit images in a place considered safe and secret, like the home." State v. Brennan, 674 N.W.2d 200, 206 (Minn.App. 2004), rev. denied (Minn. Apr. 20, 2004). Tereau contends that the search-warrant application failed to establish a nexus between himself and the upload, asserting that the information in the application connected Tereau to only the Yahoo! account.

(quotation omitted). While review of the issuing judge's decision "is limited to the information presented in the warrant application and supporting affidavit," Fawcett, 884 N.W.2d at 384-85, the "judge is entitled to draw common-sense and reasonable inferences from the facts and circumstances set forth in an affidavit," State v. Brennan, 674 N.W.2d 200, 204 (Minn. App. 2004) (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. Apr. 20, 2004).

Rosillo v. State, 278 N.W.2d 747, 749 (Minn. 1979); State v. Brennan, 674 N.W.2d 200, 206 (Minn. App. 2004) (holding that it is reasonable to infer that suspect would keep evidence of child pornography "in a place considered safe and secret, like the home"), review denied (Minn. Apr. 20, 2004).

Unlike Souto, in this case, Detective Gunderson based his statement on his experience. See State v. Brennan, 674 N.W.2d 200, 206 (Minn. App. 2004) ("Basing his conclusions on experience, rather than merely making conclusory statements, the affiant provided evidence that contributed to the district court's finding that a fair probability existed that police would find child pornography in Brennan's house."), review denied (Minn. Apr. 20, 2004).

A substantial basis means a fair probability "given the totality of the circumstances set forth in the affidavit before the issuing judge." State v. Brennan, 674 N.W.2d 200, 204 (Minn. App. 2004), review denied (Minn. Apr. 20, 2004).